https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/api.php?action=feedcontributions&feedformat=atom&user=3maisons 2026-04-22T08:47:08Z User contributions MediaWiki 1.42.1 https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=BioSec_2012:_Luc&diff=17173 2012-04-10T21:50:43Z

<p>3maisons: /* Actively Forgetting */</p> <hr /> <div>=Random Thoughts=<br /> <br /> ==Cell signalling==<br /> <br /> Chemistry vs Photonics, Electric, Sound<br /> <br /> Chemical signalling allows the signal to carry methods of transformation (essentially code) in addition to communicating state.<br /> <br /> ==Thought Experiments==<br /> <br /> What sort of emergence could we evolve from a dynamic system comprised of little computers that were essentially something akin to battery powered RFID / smartcards with limited wireless range and had interfaces for connecting themselves together for closer interactions.<br /> <br /> ==Other==<br /> <br /> IKKB protein and the reversal of insulin resistance<br /> <br /> ==Programming Atoms==<br /> <br /> Is it engineering or programming?<br /> <br /> 'Simple' building blocks coming together to create complex interactions<br /> <br /> Emergence<br /> <br /> Extensible, Reused, Re-factored, Re-appropriated, Hijacked<br /> <br /> Contaminate, Corrupt, Desecrate, Mutate, Profane, Taint, Tarnish.<br /> <br /> Life seems without qualms to re-appropriate pieces for completely different tasks.<br /> <br /> Pragmatic.<br /> <br /> I think I'm going to end this tangent here.<br /> <br /> ==Light==<br /> <br /> Photons are absorbed when they correspond to the difference in energy between two different possible electron states. Observed colours are the inverse of the objects ability to absorb photons.<br /> <br /> Light can cause physical deformations in molecular structures. An excited electron will have an orbital that allows it to bond with the second nucleus in a way that requires more energy (is stretched)<br /> <br /> Simple organisms seem to be hard-wired to respond to stimuli in predictable manners. Instead, humans get things like desire and impulses that can, to a certain extent, be overridden. The fact that we're significantly less hard-wired, where instead, we come pre-programmed to learn, this is a big deal.<br /> <br /> Is the creation of silicon-based computational devices the practice round for when we start playing with carbon?<br /> <br /> ==Life==<br /> <br /> Life seems to exist to promote its existence.<br /> <br /> Dynamic, yet stable. Homoeostasis.<br /> <br /> Stable yet evolving.<br /> <br /> Cells are the smallest unit that we consider holding the gestalt that we call life.<br /> <br /> Organelles are highly structured and almost appear to be appropriated forms of life, yet we do not consider them life?<br /> <br /> What would a computer program look like if its primary design goal was to survive indefinitely as an individual? As a species? If a computer program propagated autonomously over the network, would that be considered the individual or the species?<br /> <br /> It's hard not to wander into personal philosophies. As a theist, I find the order of this humblingly incomprehensible emergence to be divinely inspiring. However, I readily admit that the Atheists have just as good a reason to stand where they do.<br /> <br /> =Highlights=<br /> <br /> ==The death of code==<br /> <br /> I remember that we came to this insight over a decent chunk of class time, but there are two major pieces that stuck with me. The first part was expressing my frustration with software, games in particular, though GAIM / Pidgin was another non-game example, where I felt that community contribution wasn't welcome. In the cases I lamented, software had been released with some really good ideas, but had ultimately been lost to history / obsolescence because for whatever reason the primary authors did not want to relinquish control to the community of users. The end result being that once the authors moved on, the users moved on simply because once they had extracted the available value from the software, there was no sense dreaming about possible new value, there was no hope of it ever being implemented.<br /> <br /> Through those lamentations, but slightly after that, I remember collectively deciding that programs could be imbued with life, and what that meant was that people were actively working on them, dreaming up new possibilities and implementing them, while fixing the negative aspects. Live code is worked on. Live code is code that is intimately understood. Live code that is actively being made more useful, pleasurable. Once code is left, it stagnates, and finally dies slowly as those that were involved in its creation lose their intimacy.<br /> <br /> Examples of the effects of community support on software:<br /> <br /> Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines. This is both an example of death and life through the community. This was the swan song for Troika Games. Shortly after it was released the development studio went bankrupt. The end result is a game that is riddled with bugs but with a really engaging game underneath. And lots of content that was almost included but not quite. As far as I could tell, the only two official patches didn't do much at fixing the underlying issues. But, Wesp5, a member of the gaming community, took it upon themselves to hack around and see what they could do and if one were to look up the state the game is in after applying the unofficial patch, you will find a much more refined game.<br /> <br /> The Saboteur: Another swan song, this time from Pandemic studios. The game was released, the studio was closed, the game had some really interesting ideas but was also riddled with bugs, plus it had problems running on certain AMD GPUs. A couple minor patches were released but the game itself never got further than RTM and any dreams of improvement will never become a reality.<br /> <br /> Mirror's Edge: This one was prime territory for mods. A 3d platformer centred around parkour, This game was prime territory for mods. But no tools were included to allow users to do that not to mention that the copy protection on the version distributed on physical media actively killed the in-game character under certain conditions. This game was almost lost when someone discovered that one could use an editor from another unreal engine 3 based game to modify map files resulting in some amount of custom map creation, but to get them running is a hack and requires replacing an existing map with the custom version.<br /> <br /> Half Life: Released SDK, begets Counter-Strike, Day of Defeat.<br /> <br /> The Elder Scrolls: Each release has a tool kit that lets users create new content. Morrowind, released in 2002, is still played today. Oblivion actively played at least until the release of Skyrim, six years later.<br /> <br /> Minecraft. Both as the re-incarnation Infiniminer and as the result of massive community participation that made it what it is today.<br /> <br /> Quake 3: GPLed source results in many derivatives.<br /> <br /> Second Life: Only what the users made of it.<br /> <br /> ==Actively Forgetting==<br /> <br /> When change happens, the default result is that the change is permanent. If change needs to be reversed in some manner, something has to work actively work against that change to return the environment to its original condition.<br /> <br /> ==Everything Else==<br /> <br /> Want new functionality? Assimilate it.<br /> <br /> The creation of lots of little programs that do one thing well provides a rich ecosystem for programs to organize into more complex structures and amalgamate into distinct bigger units.<br /> <br /> Biological process are rarely binary. Much more analog, operating over a continuous range where &quot;more active&quot; and &quot;less active&quot; make a lot more sense than &quot;on&quot; and &quot;off&quot;</div>

3maisons https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=BioSec_2012:_Luc&diff=17172 2012-04-10T20:55:16Z

<p>3maisons: /* The death of code */</p> <hr /> <div>=Random Thoughts=<br /> <br /> ==Cell signalling==<br /> <br /> Chemistry vs Photonics, Electric, Sound<br /> <br /> Chemical signalling allows the signal to carry methods of transformation (essentially code) in addition to communicating state.<br /> <br /> ==Thought Experiments==<br /> <br /> What sort of emergence could we evolve from a dynamic system comprised of little computers that were essentially something akin to battery powered RFID / smartcards with limited wireless range and had interfaces for connecting themselves together for closer interactions.<br /> <br /> ==Other==<br /> <br /> IKKB protein and the reversal of insulin resistance<br /> <br /> ==Programming Atoms==<br /> <br /> Is it engineering or programming?<br /> <br /> 'Simple' building blocks coming together to create complex interactions<br /> <br /> Emergence<br /> <br /> Extensible, Reused, Re-factored, Re-appropriated, Hijacked<br /> <br /> Contaminate, Corrupt, Desecrate, Mutate, Profane, Taint, Tarnish.<br /> <br /> Life seems without qualms to re-appropriate pieces for completely different tasks.<br /> <br /> Pragmatic.<br /> <br /> I think I'm going to end this tangent here.<br /> <br /> ==Light==<br /> <br /> Photons are absorbed when they correspond to the difference in energy between two different possible electron states. Observed colours are the inverse of the objects ability to absorb photons.<br /> <br /> Light can cause physical deformations in molecular structures. An excited electron will have an orbital that allows it to bond with the second nucleus in a way that requires more energy (is stretched)<br /> <br /> Simple organisms seem to be hard-wired to respond to stimuli in predictable manners. Instead, humans get things like desire and impulses that can, to a certain extent, be overridden. The fact that we're significantly less hard-wired, where instead, we come pre-programmed to learn, this is a big deal.<br /> <br /> Is the creation of silicon-based computational devices the practice round for when we start playing with carbon?<br /> <br /> ==Life==<br /> <br /> Life seems to exist to promote its existence.<br /> <br /> Dynamic, yet stable. Homoeostasis.<br /> <br /> Stable yet evolving.<br /> <br /> Cells are the smallest unit that we consider holding the gestalt that we call life.<br /> <br /> Organelles are highly structured and almost appear to be appropriated forms of life, yet we do not consider them life?<br /> <br /> What would a computer program look like if its primary design goal was to survive indefinitely as an individual? As a species? If a computer program propagated autonomously over the network, would that be considered the individual or the species?<br /> <br /> It's hard not to wander into personal philosophies. As a theist, I find the order of this humblingly incomprehensible emergence to be divinely inspiring. However, I readily admit that the Atheists have just as good a reason to stand where they do.<br /> <br /> =Highlights=<br /> <br /> ==The death of code==<br /> <br /> I remember that we came to this insight over a decent chunk of class time, but there are two major pieces that stuck with me. The first part was expressing my frustration with software, games in particular, though GAIM / Pidgin was another non-game example, where I felt that community contribution wasn't welcome. In the cases I lamented, software had been released with some really good ideas, but had ultimately been lost to history / obsolescence because for whatever reason the primary authors did not want to relinquish control to the community of users. The end result being that once the authors moved on, the users moved on simply because once they had extracted the available value from the software, there was no sense dreaming about possible new value, there was no hope of it ever being implemented.<br /> <br /> Through those lamentations, but slightly after that, I remember collectively deciding that programs could be imbued with life, and what that meant was that people were actively working on them, dreaming up new possibilities and implementing them, while fixing the negative aspects. Live code is worked on. Live code is code that is intimately understood. Live code that is actively being made more useful, pleasurable. Once code is left, it stagnates, and finally dies slowly as those that were involved in its creation lose their intimacy.<br /> <br /> Examples of the effects of community support on software:<br /> <br /> Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines. This is both an example of death and life through the community. This was the swan song for Troika Games. Shortly after it was released the development studio went bankrupt. The end result is a game that is riddled with bugs but with a really engaging game underneath. And lots of content that was almost included but not quite. As far as I could tell, the only two official patches didn't do much at fixing the underlying issues. But, Wesp5, a member of the gaming community, took it upon themselves to hack around and see what they could do and if one were to look up the state the game is in after applying the unofficial patch, you will find a much more refined game.<br /> <br /> The Saboteur: Another swan song, this time from Pandemic studios. The game was released, the studio was closed, the game had some really interesting ideas but was also riddled with bugs, plus it had problems running on certain AMD GPUs. A couple minor patches were released but the game itself never got further than RTM and any dreams of improvement will never become a reality.<br /> <br /> Mirror's Edge: This one was prime territory for mods. A 3d platformer centred around parkour, This game was prime territory for mods. But no tools were included to allow users to do that not to mention that the copy protection on the version distributed on physical media actively killed the in-game character under certain conditions. This game was almost lost when someone discovered that one could use an editor from another unreal engine 3 based game to modify map files resulting in some amount of custom map creation, but to get them running is a hack and requires replacing an existing map with the custom version.<br /> <br /> Half Life: Released SDK, begets Counter-Strike, Day of Defeat.<br /> <br /> The Elder Scrolls: Each release has a tool kit that lets users create new content. Morrowind, released in 2002, is still played today. Oblivion actively played at least until the release of Skyrim, six years later.<br /> <br /> Minecraft. Both as the re-incarnation Infiniminer and as the result of massive community participation that made it what it is today.<br /> <br /> Quake 3: GPLed source results in many derivatives.<br /> <br /> Second Life: Only what the users made of it.<br /> <br /> ==Actively Forgetting==<br /> <br /> ==Everything Else==<br /> <br /> Want new functionality? Assimilate it.<br /> <br /> The creation of lots of little programs that do one thing well provides a rich ecosystem for programs to organize into more complex structures and amalgamate into distinct bigger units.<br /> <br /> Biological process are rarely binary. Much more analog, operating over a continuous range where &quot;more active&quot; and &quot;less active&quot; make a lot more sense than &quot;on&quot; and &quot;off&quot;</div>

3maisons https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=BioSec_2012:_Luc&diff=17158 2012-04-04T04:19:17Z

<p>3maisons: /* The death of code */</p> <hr /> <div>=Random Thoughts=<br /> <br /> ==Cell signalling==<br /> <br /> Chemistry vs Photonics, Electric, Sound<br /> <br /> Chemical signalling allows the signal to carry methods of transformation (essentially code) in addition to communicating state.<br /> <br /> ==Thought Experiments==<br /> <br /> What sort of emergence could we evolve from a dynamic system comprised of little computers that were essentially something akin to battery powered RFID / smartcards with limited wireless range and had interfaces for connecting themselves together for closer interactions.<br /> <br /> ==Other==<br /> <br /> IKKB protein and the reversal of insulin resistance<br /> <br /> ==Programming Atoms==<br /> <br /> Is it engineering or programming?<br /> <br /> 'Simple' building blocks coming together to create complex interactions<br /> <br /> Emergence<br /> <br /> Extensible, Reused, Re-factored, Re-appropriated, Hijacked<br /> <br /> Contaminate, Corrupt, Desecrate, Mutate, Profane, Taint, Tarnish.<br /> <br /> Life seems without qualms to re-appropriate pieces for completely different tasks.<br /> <br /> Pragmatic.<br /> <br /> I think I'm going to end this tangent here.<br /> <br /> ==Light==<br /> <br /> Photons are absorbed when they correspond to the difference in energy between two different possible electron states. Observed colours are the inverse of the objects ability to absorb photons.<br /> <br /> Light can cause physical deformations in molecular structures. An excited electron will have an orbital that allows it to bond with the second nucleus in a way that requires more energy (is stretched)<br /> <br /> Simple organisms seem to be hard-wired to respond to stimuli in predictable manners. Instead, humans get things like desire and impulses that can, to a certain extent, be overridden. The fact that we're significantly less hard-wired, where instead, we come pre-programmed to learn, this is a big deal.<br /> <br /> Is the creation of silicon-based computational devices the practice round for when we start playing with carbon?<br /> <br /> ==Life==<br /> <br /> Life seems to exist to promote its existence.<br /> <br /> Dynamic, yet stable. Homoeostasis.<br /> <br /> Stable yet evolving.<br /> <br /> Cells are the smallest unit that we consider holding the gestalt that we call life.<br /> <br /> Organelles are highly structured and almost appear to be appropriated forms of life, yet we do not consider them life?<br /> <br /> What would a computer program look like if its primary design goal was to survive indefinitely as an individual? As a species? If a computer program propagated autonomously over the network, would that be considered the individual or the species?<br /> <br /> It's hard not to wander into personal philosophies. As a theist, I find the order of this humblingly incomprehensible emergence to be divinely inspiring. However, I readily admit that the Atheists have just as good a reason to stand where they do.<br /> <br /> =Highlights=<br /> <br /> ==The death of code==<br /> <br /> I remember that we came two this insight over a decent chunk of class time, but there are two major pieces that stuck with me. The first part was expressing my frustration with software, games in particular, though GAIM / Pidgin was another non-game example, where I felt that community contribution wasn't welcome. In the cases I lamented, software had been released with some really good ideas, but had ultimately been lost to history / obsolescence because for whatever reason the primary authors did not want to relinquish control to the community of users. The end result being that once the authors moved on, the users moved on simply because once they had extracted the available value from the software, there was no sense dreaming about possible new value, there was no hope of it ever being implemented.<br /> <br /> Through those lamentations, but slightly after that, I remember collectively deciding that programs could be imbued with life, and what that meant was that people were actively working on them, dreaming up new possibilities and implementing them, while fixing the negative aspects. Live code is worked on. Live code is code that is intimately understood. Live code that is actively being made more useful, pleasurable. Once code is left, it stagnates, and finally dies slowly as those that were involved in its creation lose their intimacy.<br /> <br /> Examples of the effects of community support on software:<br /> <br /> Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines. This is both an example of death and life through the community. This was the swan song for Troika Games. Shortly after it was released the development studio went bankrupt. The end result is a game that is riddled with bugs but with a really engaging game underneath. And lots of content that was almost included but not quite. As far as I could tell, the only two official patches didn't do much at fixing the underlying issues. But, Wesp5, a member of the gaming community, took it upon themselves to hack around and see what they could do and if one were to look up the state the game is in after applying the unofficial patch, you will find a much more refined game.<br /> <br /> The Saboteur: Another swan song, this time from Pandemic studios. The game was released, the studio was closed, the game had some really interesting ideas but was also riddled with bugs, plus it had problems running on certain AMD GPUs. A couple minor patches were released but the game itself never got further than RTM and any dreams of improvement will never become a reality.<br /> <br /> Mirror's Edge: This one was prime territory for mods. A 3d platformer centred around parkour, This game was prime territory for mods. But no tools were included to allow users to do that not to mention that the copy protection on the version distributed on physical media actively killed the in-game character under certain conditions. This game was almost lost when someone discovered that one could use an editor from another unreal engine 3 based game to modify map files resulting in some amount of custom map creation, but to get them running is a hack and requires replacing an existing map with the custom version.<br /> <br /> Half Life: Released SDK, begets Counter-Strike, Day of Defeat.<br /> <br /> The Elder Scrolls: Each release has a tool kit that lets users create new content. Morrowind, released in 2002, is still played today. Oblivion actively played at least until the release of Skyrim, six years later.<br /> <br /> Minecraft. Both as the re-incarnation Infiniminer and as the result of massive community participation that made it what it is today.<br /> <br /> Quake 3: GPLed source results in many derivatives.<br /> <br /> Second Life: Only what the users made of it.<br /> <br /> ==Actively Forgetting==<br /> <br /> ==Everything Else==<br /> <br /> Want new functionality? Assimilate it.<br /> <br /> The creation of lots of little programs that do one thing well provides a rich ecosystem for programs to organize into more complex structures and amalgamate into distinct bigger units.<br /> <br /> Biological process are rarely binary. Much more analog, operating over a continuous range where &quot;more active&quot; and &quot;less active&quot; make a lot more sense than &quot;on&quot; and &quot;off&quot;</div>

3maisons https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=BioSec_2012:_Luc&diff=17157 2012-04-04T04:14:49Z

<p>3maisons: /* Something Else */</p> <hr /> <div>=Random Thoughts=<br /> <br /> ==Cell signalling==<br /> <br /> Chemistry vs Photonics, Electric, Sound<br /> <br /> Chemical signalling allows the signal to carry methods of transformation (essentially code) in addition to communicating state.<br /> <br /> ==Thought Experiments==<br /> <br /> What sort of emergence could we evolve from a dynamic system comprised of little computers that were essentially something akin to battery powered RFID / smartcards with limited wireless range and had interfaces for connecting themselves together for closer interactions.<br /> <br /> ==Other==<br /> <br /> IKKB protein and the reversal of insulin resistance<br /> <br /> ==Programming Atoms==<br /> <br /> Is it engineering or programming?<br /> <br /> 'Simple' building blocks coming together to create complex interactions<br /> <br /> Emergence<br /> <br /> Extensible, Reused, Re-factored, Re-appropriated, Hijacked<br /> <br /> Contaminate, Corrupt, Desecrate, Mutate, Profane, Taint, Tarnish.<br /> <br /> Life seems without qualms to re-appropriate pieces for completely different tasks.<br /> <br /> Pragmatic.<br /> <br /> I think I'm going to end this tangent here.<br /> <br /> ==Light==<br /> <br /> Photons are absorbed when they correspond to the difference in energy between two different possible electron states. Observed colours are the inverse of the objects ability to absorb photons.<br /> <br /> Light can cause physical deformations in molecular structures. An excited electron will have an orbital that allows it to bond with the second nucleus in a way that requires more energy (is stretched)<br /> <br /> Simple organisms seem to be hard-wired to respond to stimuli in predictable manners. Instead, humans get things like desire and impulses that can, to a certain extent, be overridden. The fact that we're significantly less hard-wired, where instead, we come pre-programmed to learn, this is a big deal.<br /> <br /> Is the creation of silicon-based computational devices the practice round for when we start playing with carbon?<br /> <br /> ==Life==<br /> <br /> Life seems to exist to promote its existence.<br /> <br /> Dynamic, yet stable. Homoeostasis.<br /> <br /> Stable yet evolving.<br /> <br /> Cells are the smallest unit that we consider holding the gestalt that we call life.<br /> <br /> Organelles are highly structured and almost appear to be appropriated forms of life, yet we do not consider them life?<br /> <br /> What would a computer program look like if its primary design goal was to survive indefinitely as an individual? As a species? If a computer program propagated autonomously over the network, would that be considered the individual or the species?<br /> <br /> It's hard not to wander into personal philosophies. As a theist, I find the order of this humblingly incomprehensible emergence to be divinely inspiring. However, I readily admit that the Atheists have just as good a reason to stand where they do.<br /> <br /> =Highlights=<br /> <br /> ==The death of code==<br /> <br /> I remember that we came two this insight over a decent chunk of class time, but there are two major pieces that stuck with me. The first part was expressing my frustration with software, games in particular, though GAIM / Pidgin was another non-game example, where I felt that community contribution wasn't welcome. In the cases I lamented, software had been released with some really good ideas, but had ultimately been lost to history / obsolescence because for whatever reason the primary authors did not want to relinquish control to the community of users. The end result being that once the authors moved on, the users moved on simply because once they had extracted the available value from the software, there was no sense dreaming about possible new value, there was no hope of it ever being implemented.<br /> <br /> Through those lamentations, but slightly after that, I remember collectively deciding that programs could be imbued with life, and what that meant was that people were actively working on them, dreaming up new possibilities and implementing them, while fixing the negative aspects. Live code is worked on. Live code is code that is intimately understood. Live code that is actively being made more useful, pleasurable. Once code is left, it stagnates, and finally dies slowly as those that were involved in its creation lose their intimacy.<br /> <br /> Examples of the effects of community support on software:<br /> <br /> Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines. This is both an example of death and life through the community. This was the swan song for Troika Games. Shortly after it was released the development studio went bankrupt. The end result is a game that is riddled with bugs but with a really engaging game underneath. And lots of content that was almost included but not quite. As far as I could tell, the only two official patches didn't do much at fixing the underlying issues. But, Wesp5, a member of the gaming community, took it upon themselves to hack around and see what they could do and if one were to look up the state the game is in after applying the unofficial patch, you will find a much more refined game.<br /> <br /> The Saboteur: Another swan song, this time from Pandemic studios. The game was released, the studio was closed, the game had some really interesting ideas but was also riddled with bugs, plus it had problems running on certain AMD GPUs. A couple minor patches were released but the game itself never got further than RTM and any dreams of improvement will never become a reality.<br /> <br /> Mirror's Edge: This one was prime territory for mods. A 3d platformer centred around parkour, This game was prime territory for mods. But no tools were included to allow users to do that not to mention that the copy protection on the version distributed on physical media actively killed the in-game character under certain conditions. This game was almost lost when someone discovered that one could use an editor from another unreal engine 3 based game to modify map files resulting in some amount of custom map creation, but to get them running is a hack and requires replacing an existing map with the custom version.<br /> <br /> Half Life: Released SDK, begets Counter-Strike, Day of Defeat.<br /> <br /> The Elder Scrolls: Each release has a tool kit that lets users create new content. Morrowind, released in 2002, is still played today. Oblivion actively played at least until the release of Skyrim, six years later.<br /> <br /> Minecraft. Both as the re-incarnation Infiniminer and as the result of massive community participation that made it what it is today.<br /> <br /> Quake 3: GPLed source results in many derivatives.<br /> <br /> Second Life: Only what the users made of it.<br /> <br /> ==Everything Else==<br /> <br /> Want new functionality? Assimilate it.<br /> <br /> The creation of lots of little programs that do one thing well provides a rich ecosystem for programs to organize into more complex structures and amalgamate into distinct bigger units.<br /> <br /> Biological process are rarely binary. Much more analog, operating over a continuous range where &quot;more active&quot; and &quot;less active&quot; make a lot more sense than &quot;on&quot; and &quot;off&quot;</div>

3maisons https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=BioSec_2012:_Luc&diff=17156 2012-04-04T03:39:25Z

<p>3maisons: /* The death of code */</p> <hr /> <div>=Random Thoughts=<br /> <br /> ==Cell signalling==<br /> <br /> Chemistry vs Photonics, Electric, Sound<br /> <br /> Chemical signalling allows the signal to carry methods of transformation (essentially code) in addition to communicating state.<br /> <br /> ==Thought Experiments==<br /> <br /> What sort of emergence could we evolve from a dynamic system comprised of little computers that were essentially something akin to battery powered RFID / smartcards with limited wireless range and had interfaces for connecting themselves together for closer interactions.<br /> <br /> ==Other==<br /> <br /> IKKB protein and the reversal of insulin resistance<br /> <br /> ==Programming Atoms==<br /> <br /> Is it engineering or programming?<br /> <br /> 'Simple' building blocks coming together to create complex interactions<br /> <br /> Emergence<br /> <br /> Extensible, Reused, Re-factored, Re-appropriated, Hijacked<br /> <br /> Contaminate, Corrupt, Desecrate, Mutate, Profane, Taint, Tarnish.<br /> <br /> Life seems without qualms to re-appropriate pieces for completely different tasks.<br /> <br /> Pragmatic.<br /> <br /> I think I'm going to end this tangent here.<br /> <br /> ==Light==<br /> <br /> Photons are absorbed when they correspond to the difference in energy between two different possible electron states. Observed colours are the inverse of the objects ability to absorb photons.<br /> <br /> Light can cause physical deformations in molecular structures. An excited electron will have an orbital that allows it to bond with the second nucleus in a way that requires more energy (is stretched)<br /> <br /> Simple organisms seem to be hard-wired to respond to stimuli in predictable manners. Instead, humans get things like desire and impulses that can, to a certain extent, be overridden. The fact that we're significantly less hard-wired, where instead, we come pre-programmed to learn, this is a big deal.<br /> <br /> Is the creation of silicon-based computational devices the practice round for when we start playing with carbon?<br /> <br /> ==Life==<br /> <br /> Life seems to exist to promote its existence.<br /> <br /> Dynamic, yet stable. Homoeostasis.<br /> <br /> Stable yet evolving.<br /> <br /> Cells are the smallest unit that we consider holding the gestalt that we call life.<br /> <br /> Organelles are highly structured and almost appear to be appropriated forms of life, yet we do not consider them life?<br /> <br /> What would a computer program look like if its primary design goal was to survive indefinitely as an individual? As a species? If a computer program propagated autonomously over the network, would that be considered the individual or the species?<br /> <br /> It's hard not to wander into personal philosophies. As a theist, I find the order of this humblingly incomprehensible emergence to be divinely inspiring. However, I readily admit that the Atheists have just as good a reason to stand where they do.<br /> <br /> =Highlights=<br /> <br /> ==The death of code==<br /> <br /> I remember that we came two this insight over a decent chunk of class time, but there are two major pieces that stuck with me. The first part was expressing my frustration with software, games in particular, though GAIM / Pidgin was another non-game example, where I felt that community contribution wasn't welcome. In the cases I lamented, software had been released with some really good ideas, but had ultimately been lost to history / obsolescence because for whatever reason the primary authors did not want to relinquish control to the community of users. The end result being that once the authors moved on, the users moved on simply because once they had extracted the available value from the software, there was no sense dreaming about possible new value, there was no hope of it ever being implemented.<br /> <br /> Through those lamentations, but slightly after that, I remember collectively deciding that programs could be imbued with life, and what that meant was that people were actively working on them, dreaming up new possibilities and implementing them, while fixing the negative aspects. Live code is worked on. Live code is code that is intimately understood. Live code that is actively being made more useful, pleasurable. Once code is left, it stagnates, and finally dies slowly as those that were involved in its creation lose their intimacy.<br /> <br /> Examples of the effects of community support on software:<br /> <br /> Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines. This is both an example of death and life through the community. This was the swan song for Troika Games. Shortly after it was released the development studio went bankrupt. The end result is a game that is riddled with bugs but with a really engaging game underneath. And lots of content that was almost included but not quite. As far as I could tell, the only two official patches didn't do much at fixing the underlying issues. But, Wesp5, a member of the gaming community, took it upon themselves to hack around and see what they could do and if one were to look up the state the game is in after applying the unofficial patch, you will find a much more refined game.<br /> <br /> The Saboteur: Another swan song, this time from Pandemic studios. The game was released, the studio was closed, the game had some really interesting ideas but was also riddled with bugs, plus it had problems running on certain AMD GPUs. A couple minor patches were released but the game itself never got further than RTM and any dreams of improvement will never become a reality.<br /> <br /> Mirror's Edge: This one was prime territory for mods. A 3d platformer centred around parkour, This game was prime territory for mods. But no tools were included to allow users to do that not to mention that the copy protection on the version distributed on physical media actively killed the in-game character under certain conditions. This game was almost lost when someone discovered that one could use an editor from another unreal engine 3 based game to modify map files resulting in some amount of custom map creation, but to get them running is a hack and requires replacing an existing map with the custom version.<br /> <br /> Half Life: Released SDK, begets Counter-Strike, Day of Defeat.<br /> <br /> The Elder Scrolls: Each release has a tool kit that lets users create new content. Morrowind, released in 2002, is still played today. Oblivion actively played at least until the release of Skyrim, six years later.<br /> <br /> Minecraft. Both as the re-incarnation Infiniminer and as the result of massive community participation that made it what it is today.<br /> <br /> Quake 3: GPLed source results in many derivatives.<br /> <br /> Second Life: Only what the users made of it.<br /> <br /> ==Something Else==</div>

3maisons https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=BioSec_2012:_Luc&diff=17155 2012-04-04T03:39:07Z

<p>3maisons: /* Highlights */</p> <hr /> <div>=Random Thoughts=<br /> <br /> ==Cell signalling==<br /> <br /> Chemistry vs Photonics, Electric, Sound<br /> <br /> Chemical signalling allows the signal to carry methods of transformation (essentially code) in addition to communicating state.<br /> <br /> ==Thought Experiments==<br /> <br /> What sort of emergence could we evolve from a dynamic system comprised of little computers that were essentially something akin to battery powered RFID / smartcards with limited wireless range and had interfaces for connecting themselves together for closer interactions.<br /> <br /> ==Other==<br /> <br /> IKKB protein and the reversal of insulin resistance<br /> <br /> ==Programming Atoms==<br /> <br /> Is it engineering or programming?<br /> <br /> 'Simple' building blocks coming together to create complex interactions<br /> <br /> Emergence<br /> <br /> Extensible, Reused, Re-factored, Re-appropriated, Hijacked<br /> <br /> Contaminate, Corrupt, Desecrate, Mutate, Profane, Taint, Tarnish.<br /> <br /> Life seems without qualms to re-appropriate pieces for completely different tasks.<br /> <br /> Pragmatic.<br /> <br /> I think I'm going to end this tangent here.<br /> <br /> ==Light==<br /> <br /> Photons are absorbed when they correspond to the difference in energy between two different possible electron states. Observed colours are the inverse of the objects ability to absorb photons.<br /> <br /> Light can cause physical deformations in molecular structures. An excited electron will have an orbital that allows it to bond with the second nucleus in a way that requires more energy (is stretched)<br /> <br /> Simple organisms seem to be hard-wired to respond to stimuli in predictable manners. Instead, humans get things like desire and impulses that can, to a certain extent, be overridden. The fact that we're significantly less hard-wired, where instead, we come pre-programmed to learn, this is a big deal.<br /> <br /> Is the creation of silicon-based computational devices the practice round for when we start playing with carbon?<br /> <br /> ==Life==<br /> <br /> Life seems to exist to promote its existence.<br /> <br /> Dynamic, yet stable. Homoeostasis.<br /> <br /> Stable yet evolving.<br /> <br /> Cells are the smallest unit that we consider holding the gestalt that we call life.<br /> <br /> Organelles are highly structured and almost appear to be appropriated forms of life, yet we do not consider them life?<br /> <br /> What would a computer program look like if its primary design goal was to survive indefinitely as an individual? As a species? If a computer program propagated autonomously over the network, would that be considered the individual or the species?<br /> <br /> It's hard not to wander into personal philosophies. As a theist, I find the order of this humblingly incomprehensible emergence to be divinely inspiring. However, I readily admit that the Atheists have just as good a reason to stand where they do.<br /> <br /> =Highlights=<br /> <br /> ==The death of code==<br /> <br /> I remember that we came two this insight over a decent chunk of class time, but there are two major pieces that stuck with me. The first part was expressing my frustration with software, games in particular, though GAIM / Pidgin was another non-game example, where I felt that community contribution wasn't welcome. In the cases I lamented, software had been released with some really good ideas, but had ultimately been lost to history / obsolescence because for whatever reason the primary authors did not want to relinquish control to the community of users. The end result being that once the authors moved on, the users moved on simply because once they had extracted the available value from the software, there was no sense dreaming about possible new value, there was no hope of it ever being implemented.<br /> <br /> Through those lamentations, but slightly after that, I remember collectively deciding that programs could be imbued with life, and what that meant was that people were actively working on them, dreaming up new possibilities and implementing them, while fixing the negative aspects. Live code is worked on. Live code is code that is intimately understood. Live code that is actively being made more useful, pleasurable. Once code is left, it stagnates, and finally dies slowly as those that were involved in its creation lose their intimacy.<br /> <br /> Examples of the effects of community support on software:<br /> <br /> Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines. This is both an example of death and life through the community. This was the swan song for Troika Games. Shortly after it was released the development studio went bankrupt. The end result is a game that is riddled with bugs but with a really engaging game underneath. And lots of content that was almost included but not quite. As far as I could tell, the only two official patches didn't do much at fixing the underlying issues. But, Wesp5, a member of the gaming community, took it upon themselves to hack around and see what they could do and if one were to look up the state the game is in after applying the unofficial patch, you will find a much more refined game.<br /> <br /> The Saboteur: Another swan song, this time from Pandemic studios. The game was released, the studio was closed, the game had some really interesting ideas but was also riddled with bugs, plus it had problems running on certain AMD GPUs. A couple minor patches were released but the game itself never got further than RTM and any dreams of improvement will never become a reality.<br /> <br /> Mirror's Edge: This one was prime territory for mods. A 3d platformer centred around parkour, This game was prime territory for mods. But no tools were included to allow users to do that not to mention that the copy protection on the version distributed on physical media actively killed the in-game character under certain conditions. This game was almost lost when someone discovered that one could use an editor from another unreal engine 3 based game to modify map files resulting in some amount of custom map creation, but to get them running is a hack and requires replacing an existing map with the custom version.<br /> <br /> Half Life: Released SDK, begets Counter-Strike, Day of Defeat.<br /> <br /> The Elder Scrolls: Each release has a tool kit that lets users create new content. Morrowind, released in 2002, is still played today. Oblivion actively played at least until the release of Skyrim, six years later.<br /> <br /> Minecraft. Both as the re-incarnation Infiniminer and as the result of massive community participation that made it what it is today.<br /> <br /> Quake 3: GPLed source results in many derivatives.<br /> <br /> Second Life: Only what the users made of it.<br /> <br /> Games in general: It would be really awesome if games were flexible enough to evolve with the technology. If resources weren't so &quot;baked&quot;, it would be much easier to bring things up to speed. Say, by allowing half-life 2 content to be played with the improvements of later source engines. Or, more radically, to allow someone to port Dark forces content to the quake III engine.<br /> <br /> ==Something Else==</div>

3maisons https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=BioSec_2012:_Luc&diff=17154 2012-04-04T02:07:53Z

<p>3maisons: /* Life */</p> <hr /> <div>=Random Thoughts=<br /> <br /> ==Cell signalling==<br /> <br /> Chemistry vs Photonics, Electric, Sound<br /> <br /> Chemical signalling allows the signal to carry methods of transformation (essentially code) in addition to communicating state.<br /> <br /> ==Thought Experiments==<br /> <br /> What sort of emergence could we evolve from a dynamic system comprised of little computers that were essentially something akin to battery powered RFID / smartcards with limited wireless range and had interfaces for connecting themselves together for closer interactions.<br /> <br /> ==Other==<br /> <br /> IKKB protein and the reversal of insulin resistance<br /> <br /> ==Programming Atoms==<br /> <br /> Is it engineering or programming?<br /> <br /> 'Simple' building blocks coming together to create complex interactions<br /> <br /> Emergence<br /> <br /> Extensible, Reused, Re-factored, Re-appropriated, Hijacked<br /> <br /> Contaminate, Corrupt, Desecrate, Mutate, Profane, Taint, Tarnish.<br /> <br /> Life seems without qualms to re-appropriate pieces for completely different tasks.<br /> <br /> Pragmatic.<br /> <br /> I think I'm going to end this tangent here.<br /> <br /> ==Light==<br /> <br /> Photons are absorbed when they correspond to the difference in energy between two different possible electron states. Observed colours are the inverse of the objects ability to absorb photons.<br /> <br /> Light can cause physical deformations in molecular structures. An excited electron will have an orbital that allows it to bond with the second nucleus in a way that requires more energy (is stretched)<br /> <br /> Simple organisms seem to be hard-wired to respond to stimuli in predictable manners. Instead, humans get things like desire and impulses that can, to a certain extent, be overridden. The fact that we're significantly less hard-wired, where instead, we come pre-programmed to learn, this is a big deal.<br /> <br /> Is the creation of silicon-based computational devices the practice round for when we start playing with carbon?<br /> <br /> ==Life==<br /> <br /> Life seems to exist to promote its existence.<br /> <br /> Dynamic, yet stable. Homoeostasis.<br /> <br /> Stable yet evolving.<br /> <br /> Cells are the smallest unit that we consider holding the gestalt that we call life.<br /> <br /> Organelles are highly structured and almost appear to be appropriated forms of life, yet we do not consider them life?<br /> <br /> What would a computer program look like if its primary design goal was to survive indefinitely as an individual? As a species? If a computer program propagated autonomously over the network, would that be considered the individual or the species?<br /> <br /> It's hard not to wander into personal philosophies. As a theist, I find the order of this humblingly incomprehensible emergence to be divinely inspiring. However, I readily admit that the Atheists have just as good a reason to stand where they do.<br /> <br /> =Highlights=</div>

3maisons https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=BioSec_2012:_Luc&diff=17075 2012-02-08T15:16:54Z

<p>3maisons: /* Cell signalling */</p> <hr /> <div>=Random Thoughts=<br /> <br /> ==Cell signalling==<br /> <br /> Chemistry vs Photonics, Electric, Sound<br /> <br /> Chemical signalling allows the signal to carry methods of transformation (essentially code) in addition to communicating state.<br /> <br /> ==Thought Experiments==<br /> <br /> What sort of emergence could we evolve from a dynamic system comprised of little computers that were essentially something akin to battery powered RFID / smartcards with limited wireless range and had interfaces for connecting themselves together for closer interactions.<br /> <br /> ==Other==<br /> <br /> IKKB protein and the reversal of insulin resistance<br /> <br /> ==Programming Atoms==<br /> <br /> Is it engineering or programming?<br /> <br /> 'Simple' building blocks coming together to create complex interactions<br /> <br /> Emergence<br /> <br /> Extensible, Reused, Re-factored, Re-appropriated, Hijacked<br /> <br /> Contaminate, Corrupt, Desecrate, Mutate, Profane, Taint, Tarnish.<br /> <br /> Life seems without qualms to re-appropriate pieces for completely different tasks.<br /> <br /> Pragmatic.<br /> <br /> I think I'm going to end this tangent here.<br /> <br /> ==Light==<br /> <br /> Photons are absorbed when they correspond to the difference in energy between two different possible electron states. Observed colours are the inverse of the objects ability to absorb photons.<br /> <br /> Light can cause physical deformations in molecular structures. An excited electron will have an orbital that allows it to bond with the second nucleus in a way that requires more energy (is stretched)<br /> <br /> Simple organisms seem to be hard-wired to respond to stimuli in predictable manners. Instead, humans get things like desire and impulses that can, to a certain extent, be overridden. The fact that we're significantly less hard-wired, where instead, we come pre-programmed to learn, this is a big deal.<br /> <br /> Is the creation of silicon-based computational devices the practice round for when we start playing with carbon?<br /> <br /> ==Life==<br /> <br /> Life seems to exist to promote its existence.<br /> <br /> Dynamic, yet stable. Homoeostasis.<br /> <br /> Stable yet evolving.<br /> <br /> Cells are the smallest unit that we consider holding the gestalt that we call life.<br /> <br /> Organelles are highly structured and almost appear to be appropriated forms of life, yet we do not consider them life?<br /> <br /> What would a computer program look like if its primary design goal was to survive indefinitely as an individual? As a species? If a computer program propagated autonomously over the network, would that be considered the individual or the species?<br /> <br /> It's hard not to wander into personal philosophies. As a theist, I find the order of this humblingly incomprehensible emergence to be divinely inspiring. However, I readily admit that the Atheists have just as good a reason to stand where they do.</div>

3maisons https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=BioSec_2012:_Luc&diff=17072 2012-02-08T07:47:34Z

<p>3maisons: /* Life */</p> <hr /> <div>=Random Thoughts=<br /> <br /> ==Cell signalling==<br /> <br /> Chemistry vs Photonics, Electric, Sound<br /> <br /> Chemical signalling allows the signal to carry methods of transformation (essentially code) in addition to communicating state.<br /> <br /> <br /> ==Other==<br /> <br /> IKKB protein and the reversal of insulin resistance<br /> <br /> ==Programming Atoms==<br /> <br /> Is it engineering or programming?<br /> <br /> 'Simple' building blocks coming together to create complex interactions<br /> <br /> Emergence<br /> <br /> Extensible, Reused, Re-factored, Re-appropriated, Hijacked<br /> <br /> Contaminate, Corrupt, Desecrate, Mutate, Profane, Taint, Tarnish.<br /> <br /> Life seems without qualms to re-appropriate pieces for completely different tasks.<br /> <br /> Pragmatic.<br /> <br /> I think I'm going to end this tangent here.<br /> <br /> ==Light==<br /> <br /> Photons are absorbed when they correspond to the difference in energy between two different possible electron states. Observed colours are the inverse of the objects ability to absorb photons.<br /> <br /> Light can cause physical deformations in molecular structures. An excited electron will have an orbital that allows it to bond with the second nucleus in a way that requires more energy (is stretched)<br /> <br /> Simple organisms seem to be hard-wired to respond to stimuli in predictable manners. Instead, humans get things like desire and impulses that can, to a certain extent, be overridden. The fact that we're significantly less hard-wired, where instead, we come pre-programmed to learn, this is a big deal.<br /> <br /> Is the creation of silicon-based computational devices the practice round for when we start playing with carbon?<br /> <br /> ==Life==<br /> <br /> Life seems to exist to promote its existence.<br /> <br /> Dynamic, yet stable. Homoeostasis.<br /> <br /> Stable yet evolving.<br /> <br /> Cells are the smallest unit that we consider holding the gestalt that we call life.<br /> <br /> Organelles are highly structured and almost appear to be appropriated forms of life, yet we do not consider them life?<br /> <br /> What would a computer program look like if its primary design goal was to survive indefinitely as an individual? As a species? If a computer program propagated autonomously over the network, would that be considered the individual or the species?<br /> <br /> It's hard not to wander into personal philosophies. As a theist, I find the order of this humblingly incomprehensible emergence to be divinely inspiring. However, I readily admit that the Atheists have just as good a reason to stand where they do.</div>

3maisons https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=BioSec_2012:_Luc&diff=17071 2012-02-08T07:26:38Z

<p>3maisons: /* Light */</p> <hr /> <div>=Random Thoughts=<br /> <br /> ==Cell signalling==<br /> <br /> Chemistry vs Photonics, Electric, Sound<br /> <br /> Chemical signalling allows the signal to carry methods of transformation (essentially code) in addition to communicating state.<br /> <br /> <br /> ==Other==<br /> <br /> IKKB protein and the reversal of insulin resistance<br /> <br /> ==Programming Atoms==<br /> <br /> Is it engineering or programming?<br /> <br /> 'Simple' building blocks coming together to create complex interactions<br /> <br /> Emergence<br /> <br /> Extensible, Reused, Re-factored, Re-appropriated, Hijacked<br /> <br /> Contaminate, Corrupt, Desecrate, Mutate, Profane, Taint, Tarnish.<br /> <br /> Life seems without qualms to re-appropriate pieces for completely different tasks.<br /> <br /> Pragmatic.<br /> <br /> I think I'm going to end this tangent here.<br /> <br /> ==Light==<br /> <br /> Photons are absorbed when they correspond to the difference in energy between two different possible electron states. Observed colours are the inverse of the objects ability to absorb photons.<br /> <br /> Light can cause physical deformations in molecular structures. An excited electron will have an orbital that allows it to bond with the second nucleus in a way that requires more energy (is stretched)<br /> <br /> Simple organisms seem to be hard-wired to respond to stimuli in predictable manners. Instead, humans get things like desire and impulses that can, to a certain extent, be overridden. The fact that we're significantly less hard-wired, where instead, we come pre-programmed to learn, this is a big deal.<br /> <br /> Is the creation of silicon-based computational devices the practice round for when we start playing with carbon?<br /> <br /> ==Life==</div>

3maisons https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=BioSec_2012:_Luc&diff=17070 2012-02-08T07:26:09Z

<p>3maisons: /* Light */</p> <hr /> <div>=Random Thoughts=<br /> <br /> ==Cell signalling==<br /> <br /> Chemistry vs Photonics, Electric, Sound<br /> <br /> Chemical signalling allows the signal to carry methods of transformation (essentially code) in addition to communicating state.<br /> <br /> <br /> ==Other==<br /> <br /> IKKB protein and the reversal of insulin resistance<br /> <br /> ==Programming Atoms==<br /> <br /> Is it engineering or programming?<br /> <br /> 'Simple' building blocks coming together to create complex interactions<br /> <br /> Emergence<br /> <br /> Extensible, Reused, Re-factored, Re-appropriated, Hijacked<br /> <br /> Contaminate, Corrupt, Desecrate, Mutate, Profane, Taint, Tarnish.<br /> <br /> Life seems without qualms to re-appropriate pieces for completely different tasks.<br /> <br /> Pragmatic.<br /> <br /> I think I'm going to end this tangent here.<br /> <br /> ==Light==<br /> <br /> Photons are absorbed when they correspond to the difference in energy between two different possible electron states. Observed colours are the inverse of the objects ability to absorb photons.<br /> <br /> Light can cause physical deformations in molecular structures. An excited electron will have an orbital that allows it to bond with the second nucleus in a way that requires more energy (is stretched)<br /> <br /> Simple organisms seem to be hard-wired to respond to stimuli in predictable manners. Instead, humans get things like desire and impulses that can, to a certain extent, be overridden. The fact that we're significantly less hard-wired, where instead, we come pre-programmed to learn, this is a big deal.<br /> <br /> Is the creation of silicon-based computational devices the practice round for when we start playing with carbon?</div>

3maisons https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=BioSec_2012:_Luc&diff=17069 2012-02-08T06:44:57Z

<p>3maisons: /* Light */</p> <hr /> <div>=Random Thoughts=<br /> <br /> ==Cell signalling==<br /> <br /> Chemistry vs Photonics, Electric, Sound<br /> <br /> Chemical signalling allows the signal to carry methods of transformation (essentially code) in addition to communicating state.<br /> <br /> <br /> ==Other==<br /> <br /> IKKB protein and the reversal of insulin resistance<br /> <br /> ==Programming Atoms==<br /> <br /> Is it engineering or programming?<br /> <br /> 'Simple' building blocks coming together to create complex interactions<br /> <br /> Emergence<br /> <br /> Extensible, Reused, Re-factored, Re-appropriated, Hijacked<br /> <br /> Contaminate, Corrupt, Desecrate, Mutate, Profane, Taint, Tarnish.<br /> <br /> Life seems without qualms to re-appropriate pieces for completely different tasks.<br /> <br /> Pragmatic.<br /> <br /> I think I'm going to end this tangent here.<br /> <br /> ==Light==<br /> <br /> Photons are absorbed when they correspond to the difference in energy between two different possible electron states. Observed colours are the inverse of the objects ability to absorb photons.</div>

3maisons https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=BioSec_2012:_Luc&diff=17068 2012-02-08T06:43:36Z

<p>3maisons: /* Programming Atoms */</p> <hr /> <div>=Random Thoughts=<br /> <br /> ==Cell signalling==<br /> <br /> Chemistry vs Photonics, Electric, Sound<br /> <br /> Chemical signalling allows the signal to carry methods of transformation (essentially code) in addition to communicating state.<br /> <br /> <br /> ==Other==<br /> <br /> IKKB protein and the reversal of insulin resistance<br /> <br /> ==Programming Atoms==<br /> <br /> Is it engineering or programming?<br /> <br /> 'Simple' building blocks coming together to create complex interactions<br /> <br /> Emergence<br /> <br /> Extensible, Reused, Re-factored, Re-appropriated, Hijacked<br /> <br /> Contaminate, Corrupt, Desecrate, Mutate, Profane, Taint, Tarnish.<br /> <br /> Life seems without qualms to re-appropriate pieces for completely different tasks.<br /> <br /> Pragmatic.<br /> <br /> I think I'm going to end this tangent here.<br /> <br /> ==Light==<br /> <br /> Photons are absorbed when they correspond to the difference in energy between two different possible electron states.</div>

3maisons https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=BioSec_2012:_Luc&diff=17067 2012-02-08T06:42:24Z

<p>3maisons: /* Programming Atoms */</p> <hr /> <div>=Random Thoughts=<br /> <br /> ==Cell signalling==<br /> <br /> Chemistry vs Photonics, Electric, Sound<br /> <br /> Chemical signalling allows the signal to carry methods of transformation (essentially code) in addition to communicating state.<br /> <br /> <br /> ==Other==<br /> <br /> IKKB protein and the reversal of insulin resistance<br /> <br /> ==Programming Atoms==<br /> <br /> Is it engineering or programming?<br /> <br /> 'Simple' building blocks coming together to create complex interactions<br /> <br /> Emergence<br /> <br /> Extensible, Reused, Re-factored, Re-appropriated, Hijacked<br /> <br /> Contaminate, Corrupt, Desecrate, Mutate, Profane, Taint, Tarnish.<br /> <br /> Life seems without qualms to re-appropriate pieces for completely different tasks.<br /> <br /> Pragmatic.<br /> <br /> I think I'm going to end this tangent here.</div>

3maisons https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=BioSec_2012:_Luc&diff=17066 2012-02-08T06:25:15Z

<p>3maisons: </p> <hr /> <div>=Random Thoughts=<br /> <br /> ==Cell signalling==<br /> <br /> Chemistry vs Photonics, Electric, Sound<br /> <br /> Chemical signalling allows the signal to carry methods of transformation (essentially code) in addition to communicating state.<br /> <br /> <br /> ==Other==<br /> <br /> IKKB protein and the reversal of insulin resistance<br /> <br /> ==Programming Atoms==<br /> <br /> Is it engineering or programming?<br /> <br /> 'Simple' building blocks coming together to create complex interactions<br /> <br /> Emergence<br /> <br /> Extensible, Reused, Re-factored, Re-appropriated, Hijacked<br /> <br /> Contaminate, Corrupt, Desecrate, Profane, Taint, Tarnish.<br /> <br /> Life seems without qualms to re-appropriate pieces for completely different tasks.<br /> <br /> Pragmatic.<br /> <br /> I think I'm going to end this tangent here.</div>

3maisons https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=BioSec_2012:_Luc&diff=17026 2012-02-03T15:26:31Z

<p>3maisons: /* February 8 */</p> <hr /> <div>=February 03=<br /> <br /> ==Cell signalling==<br /> <br /> Chemistry vs Photonics, Electric, Sound<br /> <br /> Chemical signalling allows the signal to carry methods of transformation (essentially code) in addition to communicating state.<br /> <br /> <br /> ==Other==<br /> <br /> IKKB protein and the reversal of insulin resistance</div>

3maisons https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=BioSec_2012:_Luc&diff=17025 2012-02-03T14:57:37Z

<p>3maisons: Created page with &quot;=February 8=&quot;</p> <hr /> <div>=February 8=</div>

3maisons https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=BioSec:_Evolution&diff=16929 2012-01-13T13:23:56Z

<p>3maisons: /* Causes of Variability */</p> <hr /> <div>== Purpose: ==<br /> <br /> To retell Darwin's argument associating the biological with the technological. <br /> <br /> The sections are as follows:<br /> <br /> == CHAPTER I ==<br /> === VARIATION UNDER DOMESTICATION. ===<br /> == Causes of Variability ==<br /> <br /> *Conditions of Life:<br /> **Quantity of food<br /> **Type of food<br /> **Climate<br /> *Pre-existing tendency towards variation<br /> *Nature of the Organism<br /> <br /> &quot;Indefinite Variations&quot; sounds like observations made in ignorance of genetics. Though, to be fair, we still see variations that are not well understood (Twin research, knockout mice)<br /> <br /> Darwin argues that nature exerts pressure on organisms to adapt. As conditions of life change, species will modify themselves to either streamline themselves to harsher conditions or to take advantage of conditions of abundance (domestication).<br /> <br /> However, while nature can apply external pressure on species to adapt, the species themselves will determine which parameters to modify. Determining which parameters will change seemed to be, at least to Darwin, an exercise in futility as different organisms within the species will be observed with differently modified parameters.<br /> <br /> Technology:<br /> <br /> While I'm not sure I'd call desktop Linux distributions a species, they have all mostly existed in the same environment, with environmental pressures being fairly uniform. Yet, if one were to compare Fedora, Debian, Ubuntu, Arch, Gentoo, and SuSE, it becomes glaringly obvious that each has tried to survive using different (sometimes radically different) strategies. The same can be seen in window managers, shells, scripting languages, and browsers. I, for one, would not want to have to predict how vastly increased availability in network bandwidth, or the sudden stagnation of memory availability would change the evolution of browsers.<br /> <br /> (Luc)<br /> <br /> == Effects of Habit and the use or disuse of Parts == <br /> == Correlated Variation == <br /> (Annie)<br /> == Inheritance == <br /> == Character of Domestic Varieties == <br /> (Annie)<br /> == Difficulty of distinguishing between Varieties and Species == <br /> (Annie)<br /> == Origin of Domestic Varieties from one or more Species == <br /> == Domestic Pigeons, their Differences and Origin ==<br /> <br /> (Dan)<br /> <br /> In this section Darwin argues the common ancestry of a variety of Pigeon breeds. Using the Pigeon as a case study he develops an argument proposing that despite the high variance within Pigeon breeds it can be reasoned that the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rock_Pigeon Rock Pigeon (Columba Livia)] is their aboriginal ancestor.<br /> <br /> Darwin's choice of studying Pigeons was not arbitrary (though he admits a certain infatuation with the species); a large selection of pigeon breeds was available for study and there was a historical body of treatises on the species to draw from. He begins the case study by establishing the diversity of pigeon breeds, and the aspects by which they differ. Nearly every aspect of the species is variable when examined with sufficient scope. Notable differences included the size and shape of the beak, in-flight behavior, feather appearance, age at which maturity is achieved, and skeleton details such as size, shape and count of various bone structures.<br /> <br /> With such a great level of diversity between breeds, and the striking physical differences this diversity brings, Darwin posits it would be easy for a naturalist to assume many unique ancestor species. Darwin's counter argument to this assumption builds on the absence of any candidate species to fill this ancestral role. In order to create the present breeds as anything other than sub-varieties of a common ancestor a parent species must exist for the unique traits that are to be merged. For instance, the Porter breed has a large [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crop_%28anatomy%29 crop] that would have to have been inherited in the multiple origin species hypothesis. The absence of such an origin species indicates that either ornithologists have yet to discover the species, or that it has gone extinct. Due to the proliferation of Pigeons Darwin finds both possibilities unlikely and considers this as evidence towards the common ancestor theory. Darwin points to the fertility of hybrid (mongrel) Pigeons as further evidence supporting his common ancestry theory. For such a large selection of Pigeon breeds to cross-breed successfully and produce fertile offspring their commonality must run quite deep.<br /> <br /> Interestingly Darwin notes that the naturalists dedication to their area of study reduces their ability to accept the common ancestry theory. With a deep appreciation of the differences of each breed it is the naturalist's view that only several unique species could explain the diversity they so well understand.<br /> <br /> From a computer science perspective I ponder the idea of an outside observer trying to establish the common ancestry of a handful of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/POSIX POSIX] descendent operating systems. As a user the OSX, Linux and Solaris operating systems seem highly divergent from one another. Much like a naturalist would assume no historic relation between Pigeon breeds, so too would an end user not assume a unified ancestor for the unique operating systems. Yet, underneath there are well established commonalities. Darwin's argument related to the fertility of offspring born of hybrid Pigeons could be similarly established for POSIX operating systems by means of considering a program written to POSIX standard running on the divergent operating systems mentioned. For a single program to successfully execute on three very different operating systems without the notion of a common ancestor seems highly improbable.<br /> <br /> == Principles of Selection, anciently followed, their Effects ==<br /> (Moe)<br /> <br /> -The production of domestic species: Effects may be attributed to direct and definite action of the external conditions of life and some to habit.<br /> <br /> -Adaptation seen in domesticated races is not necessarily in the species' own good but rather more to the benefit of the breeder.<br /> <br /> -The key to variation of domestic species is man's power of accumulative selection. <br /> <br /> -Nature gives successive variations, man adds them up in certain directions<br /> <br /> -Continued selection of slight variations produces races different from each other.<br /> <br /> == Methodical and Unconscious Selection ==<br /> (Elizabeth)<br /> <br /> In discussing the selection process that takes place in the breeding of domesticated animals, Darwin distinguishes two kinds of selection: ''methodical selection'', where breeders start with an idea in mind and deliberately attempt to create a new and superior species; and ''unconscious selection'', where many people try to get ahold of the best animals and by doing so, improve the breed. Darwin is primarily interested in unconscious selection, and notes the importance of observation and documentation, so that these changes become noticeable. <br /> <br /> In the world of computing, parallels of the process of unconscious selection can be seen in many situations. Some examples might be the process of code development – where the same task might be coded in several ways, and eventually unified into the most efficient process once all the possibilities have been explored. A more economically motivated example might be when multiple products are competing in a market. Though no particular consumer has any intention of improving the field of desktop publishing, all consumers want to use the product that creates the most beautiful documents. Thus, the program that most people buy gets further examination and development, leading to improvement.<br /> <br /> &lt;blockquote&gt;“Man can hardly select, or only with much difficulty, any deviation of structure excepting such as is externally visible; and indeed he rarely cares for what is internal. He can never act by selection, excepting on variations which are first given to him in some slight degree by nature.”&lt;/blockquote&gt;<br /> <br /> Darwin reflects briefly on the nature of unconscious selection, and discusses how although humankind has shaped the development of various species, the ideas always come from nature, and humans must work within the limitations of the domain.<br /> <br /> (How is this true of computing?)<br /> <br /> == Unknown Origin of our Domestic Productions ==<br /> (Elizabeth)<br /> <br /> &lt;!-- This could really use some work, pretty simplistic --&gt;<br /> <br /> Darwin briefly brings up a point about the unknown ancestors of domestic breeds. His point seems to be that the process of development through selection is slow, and individual changes are small, and this means that no one pays attention to the initial stages when the creature is undeveloped. At first glance, this section is not obviously true of computers. We know exactly where computers came from, and how they developed. However, the point about small changes sometimes leading to more important changes later is true of the development of computers. In a smaller context, it is easy to see that the reasons behind early changes are often lost, leaving behind no evidence of the program they were created to deal with.<br /> <br /> == Circumstances favourable to Man's power of Selection == <br /> (Elizabeth)<br /> <br /> <br /> In the final section of the first chapter of “The Origin of Species”, Darwin discusses the kinds of circumstances that facilitate the successful domestic selection of animals. Several of the factors Darwin lists are contextual factors. He remarks that a high degree of variability in the population is needed to attempt selective breeding, and that someone must have access to and control over a large population. In addition, he remarks that there must be some obvious value in undertaking this challenge.<br /> <br /> &lt;blockquote&gt;“… the animal or plant should be so highly valued by man, that the closest attention is paid to even the slightest deviations in its qualities or structure.”&lt;/blockquote&gt;<br /> <br /> From the perspective of facilitating the development and selection of computer programs, it seems possible that similar contextual factors are needed. In place of a high degree of population variation, we could perhaps substitute a high degree of knowledge, expertise and experience. It seems entirely sensible that an organization who has access to large amounts of expertise, experience, equipment (and presumably, budget) would be positioned to motivate and commission work in the area. Darwin’s remark that “... the [product] should be so highly valued by man, that the closest attention is paid to even the slightest deviations in its qualities or structures” can be directly applied to the construction of computer programs. It seems believable that development and evolution of computer products (whether hardware or software) are likely to be more successful when there is a clear need or use for the product. <br /> <br /> (What kind of organizations will have these privileges? Large corporations, like Google, sure. But what about people developing open source software? Crowd-sourced efforts, like Wikipedia? )<br /> <br /> Darwin also notes a few factors that affect selection that have more to do with the nature of the creature at hand. Clearly, determined selection will be much easier if the species can be easily crossed, but it is also necessary to be able to prevent species from crossing at will or at random. For computer products, these two factors seem relatively easy to accomplish. Programs usually change only in the way specified by the developers and programmers, and if left alone, most computer programs do not change, merge or reproduce. (What about computer viruses, things like that?) <br /> <br /> Part of Darwin’s discussion is of the limits of natural selection – how far can selection be pushed? He acknowledges that some limitations are defined by the capability of the product, but he also notes that external pressures affect the limitations of development. For computers, I think these limitations include hardware limitations (presumably some products will be developed at the time that the hardware exists to implement them), but I think that the external limitations come not only from the perceived need for the product, but also from the need for someone to have an idea for the product. We cannot develop products we have not thought of, or have an idea of their use or necessity.</div>

3maisons https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=BioSec:_Evolution&diff=16928 2012-01-13T13:21:06Z

<p>3maisons: /* Causes of Variability */</p> <hr /> <div>== Purpose: ==<br /> <br /> To retell Darwin's argument associating the biological with the technological. <br /> <br /> The sections are as follows:<br /> <br /> == CHAPTER I ==<br /> === VARIATION UNDER DOMESTICATION. ===<br /> == Causes of Variability ==<br /> <br /> *Conditions of Life:<br /> **Quantity of food<br /> **Type of food<br /> **Climate<br /> *Pre-existing tendency towards variation<br /> *Nature of the Organism<br /> <br /> &quot;Indefinite Variations&quot; sounds like observations made in ignorance of genetics. Though, to be fair, we still see variations that are not well understood (Twin research, knockout mice)<br /> <br /> Darwin argues that nature exerts pressure on organisms to adapt. As conditions of life change, species will modify themselves to either streamline themselves to harsher conditions or to take advantage of conditions of abundance (domestication).<br /> <br /> However, while nature can apply external pressure on species to adapt, the species themselves will determine which parameters to modify. Determining which parameters will change seemed to be, at least to Darwin, an exercise in futility as different organisms within the species will be observed with differently modified parameters.<br /> <br /> Technology:<br /> <br /> While I'm not sure I'd call desktop Linux distributions a species, they have all mostly existed in the same environment, with environmental pressures being fairly uniform. Yet, if one were to compare Fedora, Debian, Ubuntu, Arch, Gentoo, and SuSE, it becomes glaringly obvious that each has tried to survive using different (sometimes radically different) strategies. The same can be seen in window managers, shells, scripting languages, and browsers. I, for one, would not want to have to predict what the effect of vastly increased availability in network bandwidth, or the sudden stagnation of memory availability would be on the browser market.<br /> <br /> (Luc)<br /> <br /> == Effects of Habit and the use or disuse of Parts == <br /> == Correlated Variation == <br /> (Annie)<br /> == Inheritance == <br /> == Character of Domestic Varieties == <br /> (Annie)<br /> == Difficulty of distinguishing between Varieties and Species == <br /> (Annie)<br /> == Origin of Domestic Varieties from one or more Species == <br /> == Domestic Pigeons, their Differences and Origin ==<br /> <br /> (Dan)<br /> <br /> In this section Darwin argues the common ancestry of a variety of Pigeon breeds. Using the Pigeon as a case study he develops an argument proposing that despite the high variance within Pigeon breeds it can be reasoned that the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rock_Pigeon Rock Pigeon (Columba Livia)] is their aboriginal ancestor.<br /> <br /> Darwin's choice of studying Pigeons was not arbitrary (though he admits a certain infatuation with the species); a large selection of pigeon breeds was available for study and there was a historical body of treatises on the species to draw from. He begins the case study by establishing the diversity of pigeon breeds, and the aspects by which they differ. Nearly every aspect of the species is variable when examined with sufficient scope. Notable differences included the size and shape of the beak, in-flight behavior, feather appearance, age at which maturity is achieved, and skeleton details such as size, shape and count of various bone structures.<br /> <br /> With such a great level of diversity between breeds, and the striking physical differences this diversity brings, Darwin posits it would be easy for a naturalist to assume many unique ancestor species. Darwin's counter argument to this assumption builds on the absence of any candidate species to fill this ancestral role. In order to create the present breeds as anything other than sub-varieties of a common ancestor a parent species must exist for the unique traits that are to be merged. For instance, the Porter breed has a large [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crop_%28anatomy%29 crop] that would have to have been inherited in the multiple origin species hypothesis. The absence of such an origin species indicates that either ornithologists have yet to discover the species, or that it has gone extinct. Due to the proliferation of Pigeons Darwin finds both possibilities unlikely and considers this as evidence towards the common ancestor theory. Darwin points to the fertility of hybrid (mongrel) Pigeons as further evidence supporting his common ancestry theory. For such a large selection of Pigeon breeds to cross-breed successfully and produce fertile offspring their commonality must run quite deep.<br /> <br /> Interestingly Darwin notes that the naturalists dedication to their area of study reduces their ability to accept the common ancestry theory. With a deep appreciation of the differences of each breed it is the naturalist's view that only several unique species could explain the diversity they so well understand.<br /> <br /> From a computer science perspective I ponder the idea of an outside observer trying to establish the common ancestry of a handful of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/POSIX POSIX] descendent operating systems. As a user the OSX, Linux and Solaris operating systems seem highly divergent from one another. Much like a naturalist would assume no historic relation between Pigeon breeds, so too would an end user not assume a unified ancestor for the unique operating systems. Yet, underneath there are well established commonalities. Darwin's argument related to the fertility of offspring born of hybrid Pigeons could be similarly established for POSIX operating systems by means of considering a program written to POSIX standard running on the divergent operating systems mentioned. For a single program to successfully execute on three very different operating systems without the notion of a common ancestor seems highly improbable.<br /> <br /> == Principles of Selection, anciently followed, their Effects ==<br /> (Moe)<br /> <br /> -The production of domestic species: Effects may be attributed to direct and definite action of the external conditions of life and some to habit.<br /> <br /> -Adaptation seen in domesticated races is not necessarily in the species' own good but rather more to the benefit of the breeder.<br /> <br /> -The key to variation of domestic species is man's power of accumulative selection. <br /> <br /> -Nature gives successive variations, man adds them up in certain directions<br /> <br /> -Continued selection of slight variations produces races different from each other.<br /> <br /> == Methodical and Unconscious Selection ==<br /> (Elizabeth)<br /> <br /> In discussing the selection process that takes place in the breeding of domesticated animals, Darwin distinguishes two kinds of selection: ''methodical selection'', where breeders start with an idea in mind and deliberately attempt to create a new and superior species; and ''unconscious selection'', where many people try to get ahold of the best animals and by doing so, improve the breed. Darwin is primarily interested in unconscious selection, and notes the importance of observation and documentation, so that these changes become noticeable. <br /> <br /> In the world of computing, parallels of the process of unconscious selection can be seen in many situations. Some examples might be the process of code development – where the same task might be coded in several ways, and eventually unified into the most efficient process once all the possibilities have been explored. A more economically motivated example might be when multiple products are competing in a market. Though no particular consumer has any intention of improving the field of desktop publishing, all consumers want to use the product that creates the most beautiful documents. Thus, the program that most people buy gets further examination and development, leading to improvement.<br /> <br /> &lt;blockquote&gt;“Man can hardly select, or only with much difficulty, any deviation of structure excepting such as is externally visible; and indeed he rarely cares for what is internal. He can never act by selection, excepting on variations which are first given to him in some slight degree by nature.”&lt;/blockquote&gt;<br /> <br /> Darwin reflects briefly on the nature of unconscious selection, and discusses how although humankind has shaped the development of various species, the ideas always come from nature, and humans must work within the limitations of the domain.<br /> <br /> (How is this true of computing?)<br /> <br /> == Unknown Origin of our Domestic Productions ==<br /> (Elizabeth)<br /> <br /> &lt;!-- This could really use some work, pretty simplistic --&gt;<br /> <br /> Darwin briefly brings up a point about the unknown ancestors of domestic breeds. His point seems to be that the process of development through selection is slow, and individual changes are small, and this means that no one pays attention to the initial stages when the creature is undeveloped. At first glance, this section is not obviously true of computers. We know exactly where computers came from, and how they developed. However, the point about small changes sometimes leading to more important changes later is true of the development of computers. In a smaller context, it is easy to see that the reasons behind early changes are often lost, leaving behind no evidence of the program they were created to deal with.<br /> <br /> == Circumstances favourable to Man's power of Selection == <br /> (Elizabeth)<br /> <br /> <br /> In the final section of the first chapter of “The Origin of Species”, Darwin discusses the kinds of circumstances that facilitate the successful domestic selection of animals. Several of the factors Darwin lists are contextual factors. He remarks that a high degree of variability in the population is needed to attempt selective breeding, and that someone must have access to and control over a large population. In addition, he remarks that there must be some obvious value in undertaking this challenge.<br /> <br /> &lt;blockquote&gt;“… the animal or plant should be so highly valued by man, that the closest attention is paid to even the slightest deviations in its qualities or structure.”&lt;/blockquote&gt;<br /> <br /> From the perspective of facilitating the development and selection of computer programs, it seems possible that similar contextual factors are needed. In place of a high degree of population variation, we could perhaps substitute a high degree of knowledge, expertise and experience. It seems entirely sensible that an organization who has access to large amounts of expertise, experience, equipment (and presumably, budget) would be positioned to motivate and commission work in the area. Darwin’s remark that “... the [product] should be so highly valued by man, that the closest attention is paid to even the slightest deviations in its qualities or structures” can be directly applied to the construction of computer programs. It seems believable that development and evolution of computer products (whether hardware or software) are likely to be more successful when there is a clear need or use for the product. <br /> <br /> (What kind of organizations will have these privileges? Large corporations, like Google, sure. But what about people developing open source software? Crowd-sourced efforts, like Wikipedia? )<br /> <br /> Darwin also notes a few factors that affect selection that have more to do with the nature of the creature at hand. Clearly, determined selection will be much easier if the species can be easily crossed, but it is also necessary to be able to prevent species from crossing at will or at random. For computer products, these two factors seem relatively easy to accomplish. Programs usually change only in the way specified by the developers and programmers, and if left alone, most computer programs do not change, merge or reproduce. (What about computer viruses, things like that?) <br /> <br /> Part of Darwin’s discussion is of the limits of natural selection – how far can selection be pushed? He acknowledges that some limitations are defined by the capability of the product, but he also notes that external pressures affect the limitations of development. For computers, I think these limitations include hardware limitations (presumably some products will be developed at the time that the hardware exists to implement them), but I think that the external limitations come not only from the perceived need for the product, but also from the need for someone to have an idea for the product. We cannot develop products we have not thought of, or have an idea of their use or necessity.</div>

3maisons https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=BioSec:_Evolution&diff=16927 2012-01-13T12:37:22Z

<p>3maisons: /* Causes of Variability */</p> <hr /> <div>== Purpose: ==<br /> <br /> To retell Darwin's argument associating the biological with the technological. <br /> <br /> The sections are as follows:<br /> <br /> == CHAPTER I ==<br /> === VARIATION UNDER DOMESTICATION. ===<br /> == Causes of Variability ==<br /> <br /> (Luc)<br /> <br /> == Effects of Habit and the use or disuse of Parts == <br /> == Correlated Variation == <br /> (Annie)<br /> == Inheritance == <br /> == Character of Domestic Varieties == <br /> (Annie)<br /> == Difficulty of distinguishing between Varieties and Species == <br /> (Annie)<br /> == Origin of Domestic Varieties from one or more Species == <br /> == Domestic Pigeons, their Differences and Origin ==<br /> <br /> (Dan)<br /> <br /> In this section Darwin argues the common ancestry of a variety of Pigeon breeds. Using the Pigeon as a case study he develops an argument proposing that despite the high variance within Pigeon breeds it can be reasoned that the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rock_Pigeon Rock Pigeon (Columba Livia)] is their aboriginal ancestor.<br /> <br /> Darwin's choice of studying Pigeons was not arbitrary (though he admits a certain infatuation with the species); a large selection of pigeon breeds was available for study and there was a historical body of treatises on the species to draw from. He begins the case study by establishing the diversity of pigeon breeds, and the aspects by which they differ. Nearly every aspect of the species is variable when examined with sufficient scope. Notable differences included the size and shape of the beak, in-flight behavior, feather appearance, age at which maturity is achieved, and skeleton details such as size, shape and count of various bone structures.<br /> <br /> With such a great level of diversity between breeds, and the striking physical differences this diversity brings, Darwin posits it would be easy for a naturalist to assume many unique ancestor species. Darwin's counter argument to this assumption builds on the absence of any candidate species to fill this ancestral role. In order to create the present breeds as anything other than sub-varieties of a common ancestor a parent species must exist for the unique traits that are to be merged. For instance, the Porter breed has a large [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crop_%28anatomy%29 crop] that would have to have been inherited in the multiple origin species hypothesis. The absence of such an origin species indicates that either ornithologists have yet to discover the species, or that it has gone extinct. Due to the proliferation of Pigeons Darwin finds both possibilities unlikely and considers this as evidence towards the common ancestor theory. Darwin points to the fertility of hybrid (mongrel) Pigeons as further evidence supporting his common ancestry theory. For such a large selection of Pigeon breeds to cross-breed successfully and produce fertile offspring their commonality must run quite deep.<br /> <br /> Interestingly Darwin notes that the naturalists dedication to their area of study reduces their ability to accept the common ancestry theory. With a deep appreciation of the differences of each breed it is the naturalist's view that only several unique species could explain the diversity they so well understand.<br /> <br /> From a computer science perspective I ponder the idea of an outside observer trying to establish the common ancestry of a handful of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/POSIX POSIX] descendent operating systems. As a user the OSX, Linux and Solaris operating systems seem highly divergent from one another. Much like a naturalist would assume no historic relation between Pigeon breeds, so too would an end user not assume a unified ancestor for the unique operating systems. Yet, underneath there are well established commonalities. Darwin's argument related to the fertility of offspring born of hybrid Pigeons could be similarly established for POSIX operating systems by means of considering a program written to POSIX standard running on the divergent operating systems mentioned. For a single program to successfully execute on three very different operating systems without the notion of a common ancestor seems highly improbable.<br /> <br /> == Principles of Selection, anciently followed, their Effects ==<br /> (Moe)<br /> <br /> -The production of domestic species: Effects may be attributed to direct and definite action of the external conditions of life and some to habit.<br /> <br /> -Adaptation seen in domesticated races is not necessarily in the species' own good but rather more to the benefit of the breeder.<br /> <br /> -The key to variation of domestic species is man's power of accumulative selection. <br /> <br /> -Nature gives successive variations, man adds them up in certain directions<br /> <br /> -Continued selection of slight variations produces races different from each other.<br /> <br /> == Methodical and Unconscious Selection ==<br /> (Elizabeth)<br /> <br /> In discussing the selection process that takes place in the breeding of domesticated animals, Darwin distinguishes two kinds of selection: ''methodical selection'', where breeders start with an idea in mind and deliberately attempt to create a new and superior species; and ''unconscious selection'', where many people try to get ahold of the best animals and by doing so, improve the breed. Darwin is primarily interested in unconscious selection, and notes the importance of observation and documentation, so that these changes become noticeable. <br /> <br /> In the world of computing, parallels of the process of unconscious selection can be seen in many situations. Some examples might be the process of code development – where the same task might be coded in several ways, and eventually unified into the most efficient process once all the possibilities have been explored. A more economically motivated example might be when multiple products are competing in a market. Though no particular consumer has any intention of improving the field of desktop publishing, all consumers want to use the product that creates the most beautiful documents. Thus, the program that most people buy gets further examination and development, leading to improvement.<br /> <br /> &lt;blockquote&gt;“Man can hardly select, or only with much difficulty, any deviation of structure excepting such as is externally visible; and indeed he rarely cares for what is internal. He can never act by selection, excepting on variations which are first given to him in some slight degree by nature.”&lt;/blockquote&gt;<br /> <br /> Darwin reflects briefly on the nature of unconscious selection, and discusses how although humankind has shaped the development of various species, the ideas always come from nature, and humans must work within the limitations of the domain.<br /> <br /> (How is this true of computing?)<br /> <br /> == Unknown Origin of our Domestic Productions ==<br /> (Elizabeth)<br /> <br /> &lt;!-- This could really use some work, pretty simplistic --&gt;<br /> <br /> Darwin briefly brings up a point about the unknown ancestors of domestic breeds. His point seems to be that the process of development through selection is slow, and individual changes are small, and this means that no one pays attention to the initial stages when the creature is undeveloped. At first glance, this section is not obviously true of computers. We know exactly where computers came from, and how they developed. However, the point about small changes sometimes leading to more important changes later is true of the development of computers. In a smaller context, it is easy to see that the reasons behind early changes are often lost, leaving behind no evidence of the program they were created to deal with.<br /> <br /> == Circumstances favourable to Man's power of Selection == <br /> (Elizabeth)<br /> <br /> <br /> In the final section of the first chapter of “The Origin of Species”, Darwin discusses the kinds of circumstances that facilitate the successful domestic selection of animals. Several of the factors Darwin lists are contextual factors. He remarks that a high degree of variability in the population is needed to attempt selective breeding, and that someone must have access to and control over a large population. In addition, he remarks that there must be some obvious value in undertaking this challenge.<br /> <br /> &lt;blockquote&gt;“… the animal or plant should be so highly valued by man, that the closest attention is paid to even the slightest deviations in its qualities or structure.”&lt;/blockquote&gt;<br /> <br /> From the perspective of facilitating the development and selection of computer programs, it seems possible that similar contextual factors are needed. In place of a high degree of population variation, we could perhaps substitute a high degree of knowledge, expertise and experience. It seems entirely sensible that an organization who has access to large amounts of expertise, experience, equipment (and presumably, budget) would be positioned to motivate and commission work in the area. Darwin’s remark that “... the [product] should be so highly valued by man, that the closest attention is paid to even the slightest deviations in its qualities or structures” can be directly applied to the construction of computer programs. It seems believable that development and evolution of computer products (whether hardware or software) are likely to be more successful when there is a clear need or use for the product. <br /> <br /> (What kind of organizations will have these privileges? Large corporations, like Google, sure. But what about people developing open source software? Crowd-sourced efforts, like Wikipedia? )<br /> <br /> Darwin also notes a few factors that affect selection that have more to do with the nature of the creature at hand. Clearly, determined selection will be much easier if the species can be easily crossed, but it is also necessary to be able to prevent species from crossing at will or at random. For computer products, these two factors seem relatively easy to accomplish. Programs usually change only in the way specified by the developers and programmers, and if left alone, most computer programs do not change, merge or reproduce. (What about computer viruses, things like that?) <br /> <br /> Part of Darwin’s discussion is of the limits of natural selection – how far can selection be pushed? He acknowledges that some limitations are defined by the capability of the product, but he also notes that external pressures affect the limitations of development. For computers, I think these limitations include hardware limitations (presumably some products will be developed at the time that the hardware exists to implement them), but I think that the external limitations come not only from the perceived need for the product, but also from the need for someone to have an idea for the product. We cannot develop products we have not thought of, or have an idea of their use or necessity.</div>

3maisons https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=CCS2011:_Enemy_of_the_Good&diff=8317 2011-03-09T14:34:59Z

<p>3maisons: /* Introduction */</p> <hr /> <div>=ToDo=<br /> <br /> * Gather data from different IDS observables to show they aren't Gaussian<br /> ** system calls (Luc)<br /> ** network traffic<br /> ** log files<br /> * Machine learning<br /> ** standard machine learning methods approximate distributions<br /> ** approximation works best if Gaussian but has limits (show mathematically)<br /> ** non-Gaussian distributions place much harsher restrictions on error rates, they don't go down proportionally to sample size? (more math)<br /> * [[Survey of results in IDS literature]]<br /> <br /> <br /> =Title=<br /> <br /> The Enemy of the Good: Re-evaluating Research Directions in Intrusion Detection<br /> <br /> =Abstract=<br /> <br /> <br /> =Introduction=<br /> <br /> * For IDS to work, we need very accurate detectors<br /> ** base rate fallacy<br /> ** specifically, very low false alarm rates<br /> * To date, nobody has achieved sufficiently low false alarm rates to be universally applicable<br /> ** signature and spec methods can be ad-hoc tuned to be good enough but then have poor coverage of new attacks<br /> ** adaptive methods cannot be sufficiently tuned<br /> * We argue that we can't get low enough false alarm rates, that there are fundamental limits on IDS performance due to the underlying distributions of legitimate and attacker behavior.<br /> * Reasons:<br /> ** legit behavior is non-Gaussian, largely power-law like, meaning they have fat tails<br /> ** attacker behavior cannot be sampled sufficiently to learn distribution<br /> ** and besides, attacker behavior keeps changing to follow new attack innovations (more like spread of disease than Gaussian, fundamentally not stationary) and to behave more like legitimate behavior to avoid defenders<br /> ** if we could get good samples of both classes, we might be able to separate them; but instead we must do one-class learning and one-class learning cannot deal well with very long tails.<br /> ** &quot;adaptive concept drift&quot;<br /> <br /> IDS Requirements<br /> <br /> * scalability in false alarms<br /> * detect wide range of attacks<br /> ** realistically won't catch all attacks, but should go significantly beyond &quot;just what I've seen&quot; (otherwise cannot address attacker innovation)<br /> * low resource usage (network, CPU, storage/IO, user, administrator)<br /> * Stated this way, looks like a ML problem<br /> <br /> Machine Learning<br /> * many, many techniques<br /> * basic idea: combine a-priori knowledge built into learning method with observations to create classification model<br /> * IDS is a binary classification problem<br /> * most accurate methods require representative set of each class<br /> * if not both, need at least one representative set<br /> * to do this, data should have certain characteristics<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Legitimate behavior<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> **Classifier technology and the illusion of progress[http://arxiv.org/pdf/math.ST/0606441]<br /> <br /> Sections:<br /> * Problem<br /> *<br /> <br /> <br /> Best case scenario: credit card fraud detection<br /> * Two class learning is possible<br /> * Relatively low rate of data<br /> * Still has persistent false positives _and_ false negatives<br /> <br /> =What Goes Wrong=<br /> <br /> * Poor results<br /> ** datasets do not represent real-world usage or scenarios accurately<br /> ** insufficient or misleading tests of false positive rates<br /> ** Even when rates are accurate, they are misinterpreted: high FP rates are not considered to be high (wrong time scale, lack of attention to scalability)<br /> ** misleading integration of attacks into legitimate behavior<br /> * Administrative overhead<br /> ** rules that can only be created by experts, but system requires end users to create custom rules<br /> ** experts required to interpret output<br /> ** insufficient context for even experts to interpret output<br /> ** assumption of existence of security personnel that won't even exist in many important contexts<br /> * Computational overhead<br /> ** can system keep up with normal workloads?<br /> ** can system keep up with attacker-generated workloads?<br /> * Anomalies versus attacks<br /> ** why is one a good proxy for the other?<br /> ** why is chosen feature(s) particularly good at detecting attacks?<br /> * Out of the box algorithms applied w/o understanding security problem<br /> * Attacker evasion: how can attacker manipulate system? Can system lead to environment that is easier to attack?<br /> <br /> =Discussion=<br /> <br /> =Conclusion=<br /> <br /> =References=</div>

3maisons https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:COMP_3000_Essay_1_2010_Question_12&diff=3113 2010-10-12T20:14:25Z

<p>3maisons: </p> <hr /> <div>http://portal.acm.org.proxy.library.carleton.ca/citation.cfm?id=364716.364719&amp;coll=Portal&amp;dl=GUIDE&amp;CFID=107313098&amp;CFTOKEN=63043022<br /> <br /> http://www4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de/Lehre/WS01/PS_KVBK/docs/reiserfs/MosheBarReiserFS.pdf <br /> <br /> http://homes.cerias.purdue.edu/~florian/reiser/reiserfs.php It looks to be pretty accurate <br /> <br /> <br /> http://www.ntfs.com/winfs_basics.htm<br /> <br /> http://blogs.msdn.com/b/winfs/ The team blog <br /> <br /> http://channel9.msdn.com/blogs/jonudell/where-is-winfs-now &lt;-- If you are bored and want to learn about WinFs, 54 min video. <br /> <br /> http://www.splorp.com/newton/faq/newton-faq-nos.html#IIID3c an overview of the Newton OS filesystem to help you out --Rannath<br /> <br /> http://arstechnica.com/hardware/news/2008/03/past-present-future-file-systems.ars/7 BeOS --Rannath<br /> <br /> I found some other stuff for Palm OS data base, but didn't find any good yet. <br /> <br /> All the above links give good explanation of the subject. I will try to update later.<br /> <br /> -Jean-Benoit<br /> <br /> ----<br /> <br /> I found a little bit more in depth about NewtonOS:<br /> http://lowendmac.com/orchard/06/john-sculley-newton-origin.html<br /> <br /> Also, another name for Palm OS is Garnet OS. I haven't had time yet to look too much into this, but the wiki has many links to references and to the main site:<br /> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palm_OS<br /> <br /> <br /> Edit:<br /> Since there are 5 database systems listed, and 5 people in the group, we can each pick one to work on. If anyone needs help with the one they pick, holla! Also, if you find another database system you want to work on, just add it to the list and put your name beside it.<br /> <br /> <br /> WinFS - Jean-Benoit<br /> <br /> ReiserFS - Sarah L<br /> <br /> Newton OS - Daniel<br /> <br /> PalmOS/Garnet OS - Tuan Pham<br /> <br /> BeOS - <br /> <br /> Other (list)...<br /> <br /> <br /> -Daniel<br /> <br /> ----<br /> Just to check how everybody are going? There is still two people who haven't picked an FileSystem, is there a problem or you simply didn't write your name next to it? <br /> <br /> Also, for others i found an other database System made by Oracle. It is called : Internet File System. http://download.oracle.com/docs/html/A90434_01/toc.htm Here a good link to get started.<br /> <br /> I'll probably posted in the page what I have written so far later today.<br /> <br /> Also, to keep consistence, I don't know how you are writing yours, but mine will look something like that : <br /> Short history of Winfs, predecessor , etc. (by short i mean roughly 200-300 words)<br /> Short explanation on how WinFs works.<br /> It's fate and Why<br /> <br /> If you have any other idea, please share it. <br /> <br /> -Jean-Benoit<br /> <br /> ----<br /> Hey I am curious to how we are going to put all this together, are we each writing an essay for our chosen OS and then edit all the essays into one big one?<br /> <br /> -Tuan Pham<br /> <br /> ----<br /> <br /> I was thinking that we could simply have an introduction to express the general advantages and disadvantages of Database as filesystem, then create <br /> sections for our different OS. Then at the end a conclusion. <br /> <br /> But for that to work, we need most of our essay to be done in the next 2 days or so. Tuesday during the day we would need all the essay to be done so we can edit each other and write introduction + conclusion. <br /> <br /> What do you think ? Any idea?<br /> <br /> Edit : I just posted what I have so far. If you have any idea to add anything , just let me know. Also, English isn't my first language, so feel free to fix any of my errors. <br /> <br /> I'll add the reference tomorow<br /> <br /> -Jean-Benoit<br /> <br /> ----<br /> Yeah i think we should do that but how about the two section that does not have the other group member's names beside?<br /> <br /> - Tuan Pham<br /> <br /> ----<br /> <br /> I will have to post my part of the project sometime Wednesday (most likely before 2pm). I apologize if this causes some problems for the group, but I have an assignment for another class that needs to be done by Wednesday, and I have little time Tuesday to work on this (work and classes). Here is a little summary of Newton OS to get an idea. I will make sure that by Wednesday afternoon I will have at least a near-finished copy of my work (some input may be required :p ).<br /> <br /> Newton OS was used on PDAs and doesn’t have a file system, but instead uses a shallow database system. The OS considers each inserted card, as well as its internal storage, as separate stores. Each store contains either read/write databases or read-only objects. Newton eventually was cancelled and became an Apple subsidiary company, then shortly thereafter was reabsorbed into Apple. Developers from the Newton project helped with the iPod OS and the project may have had a hand in the iPhone’s development.<br /> <br /> Edit: I left a notice to the group on the front page. Hopefully the other two members will see the notice. And about the two other sections: If we have at least 3 sections, we should be good, but hopefully we hear word from the other two members...<br /> <br /> - Daniel<br /> <br /> ----<br /> I just posted what i have so far. I am having difficulties finding the fate and why so if you guys know anything let me know. Also let me know if you have any suggestions for my part.<br /> <br /> - Tuan Pham<br /> ----<br /> Sorry, I couldn't post this weekend. I'll gladly work on MurderFS/ReiserFS, and I can definitely finish before Wednesday afternoon (2ish).<br /> <br /> I really like how the WinFS sectioned is structured (although maybe condense the fate/why sections for readability?), it seems easy to follow. I agree we should all use the same sections (with additional subsections if need be). It'll make it look a lot cleaner/better put together.<br /> <br /> - Sarah<br /> <br /> Sorry, guys<br /> Seems like I am the last member of the group, I am now doing works on the BeOS, and some stuff will be posted tonight or tomorrow morning. <br /> Again, sorry for showing up late.<br /> <br /> Xi Chen<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Hi guys, Luc (lab TA ¬.¬) here, I'm seeing some good collaboration here, but I'm concerned about how coherent the end product will be. I think you guys need to spend some time working out the central thesis and how the various components will advance that point before everybody goes off to work on their little piece.<br /> <br /> --[[User:3maisons|3maisons]] 20:14, 12 October 2010 (UTC)</div>

3maisons https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:COMP_3000_Essay_1_2010_Question_10&diff=3108 2010-10-12T19:46:40Z

<p>3maisons: </p> <hr /> <div>Hey all,<br /> <br /> I think we should write down our emails here so we can further discuss stuff without having to login here.<br /> ('''***Note that discussions over email can't be counted towards your participation grade!***'''--[[User:Soma|Anil]])<br /> <br /> <br /> Geoff Smith (gsmith0413@gmail.com) - gsmith6<br /> Andrew Bujáki (abujaki [at] Connect or Live.ca)<br /> ***I'm usually on MSN(Live) for collaboration at nights, Just make sure to put in a little message about who you are when you're adding me. :)<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> I used Google Scholar and came to this page http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=812717&amp;tag=1#<br /> Which briefly touches on the issues of Flash memory. Specifically, inability to update in place, and limited write/erase cycles.<br /> <br /> Inability to update in place could refer to the way the flash disk is programmed, instead of bit-by-bit, it is programmed block-by-block. A block would have to be erased and completely reprogrammed in order to flip one bit after it's been set.<br /> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_memory#Block_erasure<br /> <br /> Limited write/erase: Flash memory typically has a short lifespan if it's being used a lot. Writing and erasing the memory (Changing, updating, etc) Will wear it out. Flash memory has a finite amount of writes, (varying on manufacturer, models, etc), and once they've been used up, you'll get bad sectors, corrupt data, and generally be SOL.<br /> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_memory#Memory_wear<br /> <br /> <br /> Filesystems would have to be changed to play nicely with these constraints, where it must use blocks efficiently and nicely, and minimize writing/erasing as much as possible.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> I found a paper that talks about the performance, capabilities and limitations of NAND flash storage. <br /> <br /> Abstract: &quot;This presentation provides an in-depth examination of the<br /> fundamental theoretical performance, capabilities, and<br /> limitations of NAND Flash-based Solid State Storage (SSS). The<br /> tutorial will explore the raw performance capabilities of NAND<br /> Flash, and limitations to performance imposed by mitigation of<br /> reliability issues, interfaces, protocols, and technology types.<br /> Best practices for system integration of SSS will be discussed.<br /> Performance achievements will be reviewed for various<br /> products and applications. &quot;<br /> <br /> Link: http://www.flashmemorysummit.com/English/Collaterals/Proceedings/2009/20090812_T1B_Smith.pdf<br /> <br /> There's no Starting place like Wikipedia, even if you shouldn't source it. <br /> <br /> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_Memory <br /> <br /> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LogFS <br /> <br /> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_disk <br /> <br /> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wear_leveling <br /> <br /> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_spot_%28computer_science%29<br /> <br /> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid-state_drive<br /> <br /> Hey Guys,<br /> <br /> We really don't have much time to get this done. Lets meet tomorrow after class and get our bearings to do this properly.<br /> <br /> Fedor<br /> <br /> <br /> A few of us have Networking immediately after class. I know personally I won't be able to make anything set on Tuesday.<br /> Additionally, he spoke briefly about hotspots on the disk for our question last week, where places on the disk would be written to far more often than others. <br /> As well, for bibliographical citing, http://bibme.org is a wonderful resource for the popular formats (I.e. MLA). If it should come down to that.<br /> ~Andrew<br /> <br /> <br /> ===links===<br /> <br /> Start Posting some stuff to source from:<br /> <br /> http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=1199079&amp;tag=1<br /> --&quot;Introduction to flash memory&quot;<br /> <br /> http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1244248<br /> --&quot;Wear Leveling&quot; (it's about a proposed way of doing it, but explains a whole bunch of other things to do that)<br /> <br /> http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1731355<br /> --&quot;Online maintenance of very large random samples on flash storage&quot; (ie dealing with the constraints of Flash Storage in a system that might actually be written to 100000 times)<br /> <br /> Hi everybody,<br /> <br /> So here are the latest news. Geoff, Andrew and myself had a meeting after class today and came up with a plan for writing this thing. <br /> <br /> We decided to have 3 parts:<br /> <br /> 1. What flash storage is, why its good but also why it must have the problems that it does (the assumption is that it must have them, why would it otherwise?)<br /> [don't know much about this just now... basics include that there is NOR (reads slightly faster)and NAND (holds more, writes faster, erases much faster, lasts about ten times longer) flash with NAND being especially popular for storage (what's NOR good for?). Here, we'd ideally want to talk about why flash was invented (supposed as an alternative to slow ROM), why it was suitable for that, and how it works on a technical level. Then, we'd want to mention why this technical functionality was innovative and useful but also why it came with two serious set-backs: having a limited-number of re-write cycles and needing to erase a block at a time.]<br /> <br /> 2. How a traditional disk-based file-system works and why the limitations of flash storage make the two a poor match<br /> [the obvious answer seems to be that traditional file-systems could just write to whatever memory was available but if they did this with a flash file-systems, certain chunks of memory would become unusable before others and the memory would be more difficult to work with. Also, disk-based file systems need to deal with seeking times which means that they want to organize their data in such a way as to reduce those (by putting related things together?) - with Flash, this isn't really a problem and thus one constraint the less to be concerned with.]<br /> <br /> 3. How a log based file-system works and why this method of operation is so well suited to working with flash memory especially in light of the latter's inherent limitations<br /> [...]<br /> <br /> At this time, the plan is that Geoff will work on #3 today, Andrew will work on #1 tomorrow and I will work on #2 tomorrow. The three of us will make an effort to consult some somewhat more painfully technical literature in order to gain insight into our respective queries. Whatever insight we find will be posted here. <br /> <br /> Then, we will meet again on Thursday after class to decide how to actually write the essay.<br /> <br /> PS, if there is anybody in the group besides the three of us - let us know so you can find a way to contribute to this... as at least two of us are competent essayists, painfully technical research would on one or more of the above topics would be a great way to contribute... especially if you could post it here prior to one of us going over the same thing. <br /> <br /> Fedor<br /> <br /> -- I'm not that great (but absolutely horrid) at essays and I'm alright at research, but if nothing else I have Thursday off and nothing (else) that needs doing by Friday so I can probably spend a bunch of time working on it just before it's due. -- ''Nick L''<br /> <br /> <br /> PS, this article http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&amp;q=cache:E7-H_pv_18wJ:citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download%3Fdoi%3D10.1.1.92.2279%26rep%3Drep1%26type%3Dpdf+flash+memory+and+disk-based+file+systems&amp;hl=en&amp;gl=ca&amp;pid=bl&amp;srcid=ADGEESgspy-jqIdLOpaLYlPPoM56kjLPwXcL3_eMbTTBRkI7PG0jQKl9vIieTAYHubPu0EdQ0V4ccaf_p0S_SnqKMirSIM0Qoq5E0NpLd0M7LAGaE51wkD0F55cRSkX8dnTqx_9Yx2E7&amp;sig=AHIEtbS-yfGI9Y48DJ0WyEEhmsXInelRGw looks really useful for part 3.<br /> <br /> PPS, and this article looks really great for understanding how log based file systems work: http://delivery.acm.org/10.1145/150000/146943/p26-rosenblum.pdf?key1=146943&amp;key2=3656986821&amp;coll=GUIDE&amp;dl=GUIDE&amp;CFID=108397378&amp;CFTOKEN=72657973<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Hey Luc (TA) here, Anandtech ran a series of articles on solid state drives that you guys might find useful. It mostly looked at hardware aspects but it gives some interesting insights on how to modify file systems to better support flash memory.<br /> <br /> http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=3403<br /> <br /> http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3531&amp;p=1<br /> <br /> http://anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3631<br /> <br /> <br /> --[[User:3maisons|3maisons]] 19:44, 12 October 2010 (UTC)</div>

3maisons https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:COMP_3000_Essay_1_2010_Question_10&diff=3107 2010-10-12T19:44:04Z

<p>3maisons: </p> <hr /> <div>Hey all,<br /> <br /> I think we should write down our emails here so we can further discuss stuff without having to login here.<br /> ('''***Note that discussions over email can't be counted towards your participation grade!***'''--[[User:Soma|Anil]])<br /> <br /> <br /> Geoff Smith (gsmith0413@gmail.com) - gsmith6<br /> Andrew Bujáki (abujaki [at] Connect or Live.ca)<br /> ***I'm usually on MSN(Live) for collaboration at nights, Just make sure to put in a little message about who you are when you're adding me. :)<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> I used Google Scholar and came to this page http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=812717&amp;tag=1#<br /> Which briefly touches on the issues of Flash memory. Specifically, inability to update in place, and limited write/erase cycles.<br /> <br /> Inability to update in place could refer to the way the flash disk is programmed, instead of bit-by-bit, it is programmed block-by-block. A block would have to be erased and completely reprogrammed in order to flip one bit after it's been set.<br /> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_memory#Block_erasure<br /> <br /> Limited write/erase: Flash memory typically has a short lifespan if it's being used a lot. Writing and erasing the memory (Changing, updating, etc) Will wear it out. Flash memory has a finite amount of writes, (varying on manufacturer, models, etc), and once they've been used up, you'll get bad sectors, corrupt data, and generally be SOL.<br /> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_memory#Memory_wear<br /> <br /> <br /> Filesystems would have to be changed to play nicely with these constraints, where it must use blocks efficiently and nicely, and minimize writing/erasing as much as possible.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> I found a paper that talks about the performance, capabilities and limitations of NAND flash storage. <br /> <br /> Abstract: &quot;This presentation provides an in-depth examination of the<br /> fundamental theoretical performance, capabilities, and<br /> limitations of NAND Flash-based Solid State Storage (SSS). The<br /> tutorial will explore the raw performance capabilities of NAND<br /> Flash, and limitations to performance imposed by mitigation of<br /> reliability issues, interfaces, protocols, and technology types.<br /> Best practices for system integration of SSS will be discussed.<br /> Performance achievements will be reviewed for various<br /> products and applications. &quot;<br /> <br /> Link: http://www.flashmemorysummit.com/English/Collaterals/Proceedings/2009/20090812_T1B_Smith.pdf<br /> <br /> There's no Starting place like Wikipedia, even if you shouldn't source it. <br /> <br /> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_Memory <br /> <br /> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LogFS <br /> <br /> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_disk <br /> <br /> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wear_leveling <br /> <br /> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_spot_%28computer_science%29<br /> <br /> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid-state_drive<br /> <br /> Hey Guys,<br /> <br /> We really don't have much time to get this done. Lets meet tomorrow after class and get our bearings to do this properly.<br /> <br /> Fedor<br /> <br /> <br /> A few of us have Networking immediately after class. I know personally I won't be able to make anything set on Tuesday.<br /> Additionally, he spoke briefly about hotspots on the disk for our question last week, where places on the disk would be written to far more often than others. <br /> As well, for bibliographical citing, http://bibme.org is a wonderful resource for the popular formats (I.e. MLA). If it should come down to that.<br /> ~Andrew<br /> <br /> <br /> ===links===<br /> <br /> Start Posting some stuff to source from:<br /> <br /> http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=1199079&amp;tag=1<br /> --&quot;Introduction to flash memory&quot;<br /> <br /> http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1244248<br /> --&quot;Wear Leveling&quot; (it's about a proposed way of doing it, but explains a whole bunch of other things to do that)<br /> <br /> http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1731355<br /> --&quot;Online maintenance of very large random samples on flash storage&quot; (ie dealing with the constraints of Flash Storage in a system that might actually be written to 100000 times)<br /> <br /> Hi everybody,<br /> <br /> So here are the latest news. Geoff, Andrew and myself had a meeting after class today and came up with a plan for writing this thing. <br /> <br /> We decided to have 3 parts:<br /> <br /> 1. What flash storage is, why its good but also why it must have the problems that it does (the assumption is that it must have them, why would it otherwise?)<br /> [don't know much about this just now... basics include that there is NOR (reads slightly faster)and NAND (holds more, writes faster, erases much faster, lasts about ten times longer) flash with NAND being especially popular for storage (what's NOR good for?). Here, we'd ideally want to talk about why flash was invented (supposed as an alternative to slow ROM), why it was suitable for that, and how it works on a technical level. Then, we'd want to mention why this technical functionality was innovative and useful but also why it came with two serious set-backs: having a limited-number of re-write cycles and needing to erase a block at a time.]<br /> <br /> 2. How a traditional disk-based file-system works and why the limitations of flash storage make the two a poor match<br /> [the obvious answer seems to be that traditional file-systems could just write to whatever memory was available but if they did this with a flash file-systems, certain chunks of memory would become unusable before others and the memory would be more difficult to work with. Also, disk-based file systems need to deal with seeking times which means that they want to organize their data in such a way as to reduce those (by putting related things together?) - with Flash, this isn't really a problem and thus one constraint the less to be concerned with.]<br /> <br /> 3. How a log based file-system works and why this method of operation is so well suited to working with flash memory especially in light of the latter's inherent limitations<br /> [...]<br /> <br /> At this time, the plan is that Geoff will work on #3 today, Andrew will work on #1 tomorrow and I will work on #2 tomorrow. The three of us will make an effort to consult some somewhat more painfully technical literature in order to gain insight into our respective queries. Whatever insight we find will be posted here. <br /> <br /> Then, we will meet again on Thursday after class to decide how to actually write the essay.<br /> <br /> PS, if there is anybody in the group besides the three of us - let us know so you can find a way to contribute to this... as at least two of us are competent essayists, painfully technical research would on one or more of the above topics would be a great way to contribute... especially if you could post it here prior to one of us going over the same thing. <br /> <br /> Fedor<br /> <br /> -- I'm not that great (but absolutely horrid) at essays and I'm alright at research, but if nothing else I have Thursday off and nothing (else) that needs doing by Friday so I can probably spend a bunch of time working on it just before it's due. -- ''Nick L''<br /> <br /> <br /> PS, this article http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&amp;q=cache:E7-H_pv_18wJ:citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download%3Fdoi%3D10.1.1.92.2279%26rep%3Drep1%26type%3Dpdf+flash+memory+and+disk-based+file+systems&amp;hl=en&amp;gl=ca&amp;pid=bl&amp;srcid=ADGEESgspy-jqIdLOpaLYlPPoM56kjLPwXcL3_eMbTTBRkI7PG0jQKl9vIieTAYHubPu0EdQ0V4ccaf_p0S_SnqKMirSIM0Qoq5E0NpLd0M7LAGaE51wkD0F55cRSkX8dnTqx_9Yx2E7&amp;sig=AHIEtbS-yfGI9Y48DJ0WyEEhmsXInelRGw looks really useful for part 3.<br /> <br /> PPS, and this article looks really great for understanding how log based file systems work: http://delivery.acm.org/10.1145/150000/146943/p26-rosenblum.pdf?key1=146943&amp;key2=3656986821&amp;coll=GUIDE&amp;dl=GUIDE&amp;CFID=108397378&amp;CFTOKEN=72657973<br /> <br /> Hey Guys, Anandtech ran a series of articles on solid state drives that you guys might find useful. It mostly looked at hardware aspects but it gives some interesting insights on how to modify file systems to better support flash memory.<br /> <br /> http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=3403<br /> http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3531&amp;p=1<br /> http://anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3631<br /> <br /> --[[User:3maisons|3maisons]] 19:44, 12 October 2010 (UTC)</div>

3maisons https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:COMP_3000_Essay_1_2010_Question_6&diff=3098 2010-10-12T19:19:37Z

<p>3maisons: </p> <hr /> <div>Hey guys, this is Munther. I'm one of the members of the group assigned to this question. Before we start, let me just say that since this is a collective piece of work thats supposed to include contributions from each member of the group, let us all assume the role of the editor. So we will all contribute and help edit the final version of the article.<br /> <br /> Regarding our question. As a starting point, I figured it would be appropriate to start defining what mutual exclusion (mutex) and race conditions mean. Lets start with race conditions, since mutual exclusion basically came to life because of the need to control race conditions.<br /> <br /> Race conditions: situations where one or more processes are trying to write, read or access the same piece of data, and the final result depends on who runs precisely when. Look at the text book in pages 117-118 for a detailed example of that.<br /> <br /> Mutual exclusion (mutex): the idea of making sure that processes access data in a serialized way. Meaning that, if process A for instance, happens to be executing or using a particular data structure (called a critical section), then no other process like B would be allowed to execute or use that very same data structure (critical section) until process A finishes executing or decides to leave the data structure. Common algorithms and techniques used in mutual exclusion include: locks, semaphores and monitors.<br /> <br /> Our question asks for examples of systems that have failed due to flawed efforts. For starters, this is a wiki-programming page (Rosetta code) that examines race conditions and offers an example from the Unix/Linux operating systems, whether the example mentioned here is considered a &quot;failure&quot; we should check with the prof. Anyways, its a good starting point.<br /> http://rosettacode.org/wiki/Race_condition<br /> <br /> Heres also a paper that goes back to 1992, which basically examines the excessive amount of expenses and resources used in older versions of the Unix system when implementing mutual exclusion. The paper goes to explain the problem and offers a better solution. Its pretty easy to follow and understand, worth reading as well.<br /> http://www.usenix.org/publications/library/proceedings/sa92/moran.pdf<br /> <br /> -- Munther --[[User:Hesperus|Hesperus]] 16:21, 11 October 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ----<br /> <br /> <br /> Hey Andrew here another member of this group. Those are some good starting points. The Wikipedia page on race conditions have references to a few good examples http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_condition<br /> <br /> Couple notable ones:<br /> <br /> The Therac-25 x-ray machine which killed a bunch of people http://courses.cs.vt.edu/~cs3604/lib/Therac_25/Side_bar_1.html<br /> <br /> A blackout in 2003 was caused by a race condition in one of the power company's alarm systems http://www.securityfocus.com/news/8412 (really awful block of text)<br /> <br /> --Andrew<br /> <br /> -----<br /> <br /> <br /> Alright, so the things that the prof mentioned in our last lecture proved to be super helpful. Basically, what he means by &quot;systems&quot;, is any device based operating system. It doesn't necessarily has to be a PC-based operating system (Windows, Linux, etc.). So the Therac-25 story mentioned by Andrew in the above post is a prime example of the type of things we might be looking for.<br /> <br /> Other notable examples:<br /> <br /> 1. The Opportunity Mars-Rover 1116 incident. (A rover is basically a space exploration vehicle designed to navigate the surface of a planet in order to gather images, samples or any possible information about that particular surface.). The rover experienced a rare unexpected error due to a race-conditions fault. For some reason, this seems to be a fairly common problem for those Mars-Rovers, since the same kind of error was experienced on the Spirit Mars-Rover as well. <br /> <br /> Heres an overview of the Opportunity 1116 incident from MarsToday : http://www.marstoday.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=23772<br /> <br /> Heres a paper that examines the race conditions experienced on those rovers, discuses the Spirit Rover incident and even goes to <br /> explain the underlying architecture of the rover hardware: http://trs-new.jpl.nasa.gov/dspace/bitstream/2014/39897/1/06-0922.pdf<br /> <br /> <br /> 2. A file-system based type of race condition involves an older version of the Unix operating system, in which the user-mode can actually be bypassed, allowing the user to access the entire system. I can see this being considered an error or a case of failure as well. This actually may be a bit more approachable, as far as understanding the Unix kernel and stuff like that, I'm sure we can find a lot of resources for this.<br /> <br /> A small article exploring the issue: http://www.osdata.com/holistic/security/attacks/racecond.html<br /> <br /> - - - - - - - - - - -<br /> <br /> Heres also a paper that examines Race Conditions in depth, talks about the importance of mutual exclusion and provides a number of solutions :<br /> http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&amp;source=web&amp;cd=4&amp;ved=0CCoQFjAD&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fciteseerx.ist.psu.edu%2Fviewdoc%2Fdownload%3Fdoi%3D10.1.1.1.5897%26rep%3Drep1%26type%3Dpdf&amp;rct=j&amp;q=race%20conditions%20case%20study%20steve%20carr%2010.1.1.1&amp;ei=FTCtTOzRN8mVnAeL-OThDA&amp;usg=AFQjCNHdyHdeFSpES0nMjzb7lPkFxKwC2g&amp;sig2=u2Qo9kdemxdCWAlH10GNeQ<br /> <br /> Heres another paper from the ACM Portal: http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=130616.130623&amp;coll=Portal&amp;dl=GUIDE&amp;CFID=104720795&amp;CFTOKEN=13393160<br /> <br /> If anyone can't access the pdf files on the ACM Portal or even CiteSeer for that matter, you need to log in to the netwrk using your Carleton library account. Go to the following: http://portal.acm.org.proxy.library.carleton.ca<br /> You will be prompted to enter your Student ID card barcode number, thats the number below your name on your student ID. And the password is your CarletonCentral password.<br /> <br /> I think so far we have managed to gather a handful amount of cases. In the next couple of days, we should probably delve deeper into some of those cases.<br /> <br /> PS: If you wanna contact me, go to my profile in the history tab. Click on Hesperus.<br /> <br /> -- Munther --[[User:Hesperus|Hesperus]] 16:21, 11 October 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> --------------------<br /> <br /> Hey guys, I am Daniel. I am also in group 6 (Am i the final group member?). I'm ready to help get this show on the road! I am going to set up a basic essay structure on the other page so that we know what to aim for. You guys look like you've rounded up quite a bit of info on the subject already, great job!<br /> <br /> Introduction Paragraph: Introduces the question and gives some general background etc.<br /> Paragraph 1: Gives first example in detail<br /> Paragraph 2: Gives second example in detail<br /> Paragraph 3: Gives third example in detail<br /> Conclusion: Relates it all back together or something (never been good with conclusions) <br /> <br /> <br /> I think each example paragraph should be broken down like this:<br /> <br /> 1. Introduction to the example<br /> 2. What they tried to use the Multi-Threading to do (or something like that)<br /> 3. Story of the system failing<br /> 4. The significance/involvement of race condition and mutual exclusion in the failure<br /> 5. Conclusion (how it was solved and stuff like that can go here too)<br /> <br /> [[User:Dsont|Dsont]] 03:05, 11 October 2010 (UTC) (this date is wrong for this edit)<br /> <br /> -----<br /> <br /> <br /> Hey guys, I'm Fangchen. I am also in group 6. (So I might be the last member lol) <br /> I found a chapter of a book from sun, which name of the chapter is Race Conditions and<br /> Mutual Exclusion.There are some examples on race condition in Java programming which i think we could study for sure.<br /> <br /> The link of the book chapter is here.<br /> <br /> http://java.sun.com/developer/Books/performance2/chap3.pdf<br /> <br /> On page 2 of the pdf file, there is a first example of race condition. I think this might be useful in our essay as a case study.<br /> <br /> <br /> --Fangchen<br /> <br /> ----<br /> My name is Julie and I believe that I am the last group member. Our professor said that every group has 5 to 6 members.<br /> It appears that we have quite the list of resources. Are we planning to use them all? It might be a good idea to list the resources we believe are the most relevant. <br /> <br /> Note: This link, http://www.osdata.com/holistic/security/attacks/racecond.html, is broken. <br /> <br /> I only have one resource to add. I found a paper that summarizes information about Therac-25 and the blackout of 2003: http://x4.6times7.org/downloads/software_catastrophes.pdf.<br /> <br /> 4.1 Blackout (pg. 5 – 6)<br /> <br /> 4.3 Therac-25 (pg. 7 – 8)<br /> <br /> I think we should agree on a thesis soon. Currently the examples in our essay are not connected by a central argument. If we have time, I think we should try to find another example (assuming we have agreed to write about Therac-25, the blackout of 2003 and the Mars rovers). Prof. Anil said that he was expecting four to five examples. Three examples is a minimum. I have been trying to search for one that is not as well known (as encouraged in class) but I have not had any luck.<br /> <br /> Are the series of Mars rovers (Opportunity and Spirit from 2004-2005) the most recent examples? I have not found any that are more recent so far. I wonder if systems programmers have learned from these past failures. I noticed, while searching for resources, that researchers have developed/are now developing tools and strategies to detect race conditions. <br /> <br /> Lastly, what is our plan on how divide the work for this essay? Also do we want to meet in person someday?<br /> <br /> --[[User:J powers|J powers]] 16:08, 9 October 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> One suggestion I have for dividing the work is for everyone to write a paragraph of the essay or about a specific disaster.<br /> --[[User:J powers|J powers]] 16:50, 9 October 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> -----<br /> <br /> Cool, its good to have the other members of the group on board. I will handle the editing and the introductory paragraph. I will try to make it as academic as possible. <br /> <br /> What Julie mentioned is right. The prof said that 3 examples are alright. But he's really looking for 4-5 cases. We need to impress him a little bit here. The other case he mentioned was the Blue-Screens-Of-Death incidents. I believe a mail man was killed because of that. I will try to find some information on that later on today. <br /> <br /> Also, if you guys wanna meet up a couple of days before the due date, thats ok by me. We can meet up in the Herzberg labs in the 4th floor, not the undergrad ones, the ones at the end of the hall. Or I can reserve a room for us in the library. Or if you just want to continue doing this online, I know that each one of us has probably a different schedule and everything.<br /> <br /> -- Munther --[[User:Hesperus|Hesperus]] 16:21, 11 October 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ----<br /> <br /> Alright, Seems we needed more than i originally thought :p so i tweaked the other page to have 5 of them instead of 3. I would absolutely like to meet up :D. Doing this online thing makes me feel wierd for some reason...<br /> <br /> But if we do meet up lets put all our discussion and decisions on the page here so it can get reviewed etc.<br /> <br /> If we are gonna meet up I would prefer Herzberg (not that it really matters, its just where i hang out anyways)<br /> <br /> Also is this due on tuesday or thursday?<br /> <br /> [[User:Dsont|Dsont]] 03:06, 11 October 2010 (UTC) this date is wrong for this edit<br /> <br /> Started using tildes now thanks julie<br /> <br /> ---<br /> Ok everyone write in here when you are available before the 14th<br /> <br /> Daniel: all day Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday<br /> Munther: --<br /> Fangchen: --<br /> Andrew: After 12:30 Tues-Wed-Thurs<br /> Julie: Tuesday after 2:30, and Wednesday/Thursday after 1:00　[[User:J powers|J powers]] 19:32, 10 October 2010 (UTC)<br /> cha0s: monday in the afternoon, tuesday after 1, and all day wednesday<br /> ----<br /> <br /> Hey Everyone. Awesome looks like we have a lot of information and resources here to work from. Daniels template structure looks good and we should follow that. We should come up with a plan for executing this, what topics we want to cover and who would like to focus on what. I think the 3 big examples we've found lots of resources for are the Therac-25, Mars Rover and the Blackout. The professor mentioned he'd like to see some more exotic examples lets try and find some for examples 4/5.<br /> <br /> Layout we can build on.<br /> <br /> <br /> Introduction<br /> <br /> Therac-25<br /> <br /> Mars Rover<br /> <br /> Blackout<br /> <br /> Example 4<br /> <br /> Example 5<br /> <br /> Conclusion<br /> <br /> <br /> I'm going to try and read up a bit more on the Therac-25 and put in a few paragraphs today.<br /> <br /> [[User:Atubman|Atubman]] 21:55, 10 October 2010 (UTC) (did not know about the 4 tildes thing, thanks for sharing)<br /> ----<br /> I do not mind which topic I write about but I feel a personal connection with the blackout. My hometown was affected for a long time and there were concerns about chemical plants nearby. Therefore I have an interest in writing/researching about it.<br /> <br /> Has the group member above (&lt;strike&gt;Could you please put your name? Was it Andrew?&lt;/strike&gt;) decided on Therac-25 then? <br /> <br /> Also I have noticed that everyone has not been using 4 tildes. I am not sure if this how the professor knows who wrote what but it would not hurt to use it (Less to type as well). <br /> <br /> Any ideas on a deadline for all of our writing?<br /> <br /> [[User:J powers|J powers]] 21:05, 10 October 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ----<br /> <br /> I tried writing up a bit about the Therac-25. Still pretty rough but its a start.<br /> <br /> Good information in this paper http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/therac.pdf<br /> <br /> Pages 22-28 deal with the software bug<br /> <br /> [[User:Atubman|Atubman]] 23:27, 10 October 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ----<br /> <br /> Yo, I'm guessing I'm the last member, putting us at 6. I'll post what I've got for my section later tonight. I'm good to meet monday in the afternoon, tuesday after 1, and all day wednesday.<br /> <br /> [[User:cha0s|cha0s]] 20:00, 10 October 2010 (EDT)<br /> <br /> -----<br /> <br /> Looks like tuesday is a good day, wait to see for the rest to confirm?<br /> [[User:Dsont|Dsont]] 03:08, 11 October 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ----<br /> <br /> Yo, after looking around a bit, it seems like it might be better to just cover three topics in greater depth, as the three we have currently have a lot of documentation. This will also demonstrate the ability we have to work together more so than us doing a seperate paragraph each<br /> <br /> [[User:cha0s|cha0s]] 3:02, 11 October 2010 (EDT)<br /> <br /> ------<br /> <br /> <br /> Hey guys. Like I mentioned before, I will handle the editing, introductory paragraph, conclusions and the Mars-Rover incidents case. In the mean time, I strongly urge other members of the group to look into the Blackout case and try to find us another case like the Blue-Screens-of-Death which the prof mentioned in class. Most of the cases I found were all software related. Nothing major. So it would be great to have someone help with the research. We we will try as much as possible to deliver 4 cases.<br /> <br /> -- Munther --[[User:Hesperus|Hesperus]] 16:21, 11 October 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ----<br /> <br /> I've been looking for a while now, and I can't find any major system failures related to the topic except the three we already have. I'll focus my research on the blackout case for now. <br /> <br /> [[User:cha0s|cha0s]] 16:34, 11 October 2010 (EDT)<br /> <br /> ----<br /> <br /> Posted a rough section for the 2003 Black-Out. Will add citations and contribute to the Therac 25 section later tonight. If anyone has found a fourth topic, post it and i'll try and find some more info on it.<br /> <br /> [[User:cha0s|cha0s]] 18:54, 11 October 2010 (EDT)<br /> <br /> -----<br /> <br /> Hey guys. I've edited the article, provided an introduction and an overview piece. Plus, I've posted the first part of the Mars-Rover incident. This is just a rough version. The article of course needs further editing. I will keep editing and updating the Mars-Rover case in the next 24 hours. I also started a section for the Blue-Screens-Of-Death incidents. I don't think theres any harm in doing that, I've found that this was a fairly common problem in some versions of Windows leading to a handful of system failures in airports, electronic hoardings, it even happened at the Beijing Summer Olympics of 2008 ! So this could be a potential case as well. I will try to consult the prof regarding this today, he might provide us with some hints or crucial talking points.<br /> <br /> Munther --[[User:Hesperus|Hesperus]] 06:20, 12 October 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ----<br /> <br /> I guess ill do Blue Screens then<br /> <br /> [[User:Dsont|Dsont]] 13:36, 12 October 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> ---- <br /> Ok, so in today's lecture, Thomas (chaOs) inquired about the essay and the prof mentioned that three cases would be enough. But if we wanna go fancy, a fourth case might be a good idea. I think it would be a lot better if we we focus on the three cases at hand and leave the blue-screens-of-death to the end. The prof also talked about plagiarism and emphasized the need to be '''original'''. Even if we cite the resources, the article itself has to be original in the sense that it carries through the reader's understanding. So no copy and pasting will be tolerated. In fact, I'm going back to the Mars-Rover incident to do a re-edit and make sure theres no direct phrasing or imitation of style. He suggested that it would be a good idea to read and understand the article and then put it away and try to phrase and deliver the concepts and notions using one's words. It would be ok to use the exact scientific terms, though. Theres no escaping that I guess.<br /> <br /> Munther --[[User:Hesperus|Hesperus]] 14:35, 12 October 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> <br /> Hey, If you guys want more things to talk about, the Linux kernel has suffered many a race condition failure leading to security vulnerabilities that allow root / kernel level access. I remember one from a while ago that hit Slashdot where a local user could cause a race condition that caused a null pointer (a pointer that's essentially set to 0x00000000) to be dereferenced resulting in the kernel trying to execute at address 0. Now if you stick your own code at 0, you can now run your own code in the kernel ;)<br /> <br /> --[[User:3maisons|3maisons]] 19:19, 12 October 2010 (UTC)</div>

3maisons https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:COMP_3000_Essay_1_2010_Question_3&diff=3088 2010-10-12T18:59:48Z

<p>3maisons: </p> <hr /> <div>== Group 3 == <br /> Here's my email I'll add some of the stuff I find soon I'm just saving the question for last.<br /> Andrew Bown(abown2@connect.carleton.ca)<br /> <br /> I'm not sure if this is totally relevant, oh well.<br /> -First time sharing system CTSS (Compatible Time Sharing System) in the 1950s. Created at MIT<br /> http://www.kernelthread.com/publications/virtualization/<br /> <br /> -achamney@connect.carleton.ca<br /> <br /> Here's my contact info (qzhang13@connect.carleton.ca)<br /> An article about the mainframe.<br /> -Mainframe Migration http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver/mainframe/migration.mspx<br /> <br /> -[[User:Zhangqi|Zhangqi]] 15:02, 7 October 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Here's my contact information, look forward to working with everyone. - Ben Robson (brobson@connect.carleton.ca)<br /> <br /> Hey, Here's my contact info, nshires@connect.carleton.ca, I'll have some sources posted by the weekend hopefully<br /> <br /> Hey guys i'm not in your group but I found some useful information that could help you <br /> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mainframe_computer i know we are not suppose to use wiki references but its a good place to start<br /> <br /> Okay found an article paper titled called&quot;Mainframe Scalability in the Windows Environment&quot;<br /> http://new.cmg.org/proceedings/2003/3023.pdf (required registration to access but is free)~ Andrew (abown2@connect.carleton.ca)sometime friday.<br /> <br /> Folks, remember to do your discussions here. Use four tildes to sign your entries, that adds time and date. Email discussions won't count towards your participation grade...<br /> [[User:Soma|Anil]] 15:43, 8 October 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Okay going to break the essay into points paragraphs on the main page which people can choose one paragraph to write. Then after all paragraphs are written we will communally edit it to have a cohesive voice. It is the only way I can viably think of to properly distribute the work. ~Andrew (abown2@connect.carleton.ca) 11:00 am, 10 October 2010.<br /> <br /> Link to IBMs info on their mainframes --[[User:Lmundt|Lmundt]] 19:58, 7 October 2010 (UTC)<br /> http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/zos/basics/index.jsp?topic=/com.ibm.zos.zmainframe/zconc_valueofmf.htm<br /> <br /> Just made the revelation that when trying to find information on the Windows equivalent to mainframe is refered to as '''clustering''' which should help finding information.<br /> Here's the wiki article on the technology for an overview http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Cluster_Server ~ Andrew (abown2@connect.carleton.ca<br /> <br /> hey,I agree with Andrew's idea. We should break the essay into several sections and work it together.From my point of view, I think we should focus on how Windows provide the mainframe functionality and the VMware and EMC's storage should be our examples. As listed on the main page, there are many advantages and disadvantages of the mainframe.But where is Windows? I'm confused... <br /> In my opinion, the first paragraph can introduct the mainframe (such as the history,features,application,etc) and what mainframe-equivalent functionality Windows support. Then we can use some paragraphs to discuss the functionalities in details. And VMware and EMC's storage solution also can be involved in this part. At last we make a conclusion of the whloe essay. Do you think it's feasible? <br /> <br /> --[[User:Zhangqi|Zhangqi]] 02:12, 11 October 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> Ah but the question isn't the pros and cons of each. It is how to get mainframe functionality from a Windows Operating System. How I split up the essay has each paragraph focusing on one aspect of mainframes and how it can be duplicated in windows either with windows tools or 3rd party software. You don't need to go into the history or applications of mainframes since that is not required by the phrasing of the question.<br /> <br /> ~ Andrew Bown, 11:28 AM, October 11th 2010<br /> <br /> Okay, I think I catch your meaning. So now we should do is to edit the content of each paragragh as soon as possible. Time is limited.<br /> <br /> --[[User:Zhangqi|Zhangqi]] 19:57, 11 October 2010 (UTC)<br /> <br /> If you guys are looking for an authoritative source on how Windows works, I *highly* recommend checking out &quot;Window Internals 4th Edition&quot; or &quot;Windows Internals 5th Edition&quot; by Mark Russinovich and David Solomon.<br /> <br /> --[[User:3maisons|3maisons]] 18:59, 12 October 2010 (UTC)</div>

3maisons